UNEP-WCMC technical report

Review of selected corals from Indonesia

(Version edited for public release)

2 Review of selected corals from Indonesia Prepared for The European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Directorate E - Global & Regional Challenges, LIFE ENV.E.2. – Global Sustainability, Trade & Multilateral Agreements, Brussels, Belgium

Prepared June 2015

Copyright European Commission 2015

Citation UNEP-WCMC. 2015. Review of selected corals from Indonesia. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.

The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment of the United Nations Environment Programme, the world’s foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, combining scientific research with policy advice and the development of decision tools.

We are able to provide objective, scientifically rigorous products and services to help decision- makers recognize the value of biodiversity and apply this knowledge to all that they do. To do this, we collate and verify data on biodiversity and ecosystem services that we analyze and interpret in comprehensive assessments, making the results available in appropriate forms for national and international level decision-makers and businesses. To ensure that our work is both sustainable and equitable we seek to build the capacity of partners where needed, so that they can provide the same services at national and regional scales.

The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP, contributory organisations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the European Commission or contributory organisations, editors or publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of a commercial entity or product in this publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP.

UNEP promotes UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre environmentally sound (UNEP-WCMC) practices globally and in its 219 Huntingdon Road, own activities. Printing on Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK paper from environmentally Tel: +44 1223 277314 sustainable forests and www.unep-wcmc.org recycled fibre is encouraged.

Contents 3

Introduction ...... 4 Coral management in Indonesia ...... 5 Catalaphyllia jardinei II/B ...... 10 Euphyllia cristata II/B ...... 14 Plerogyra sinuosa II/B ...... 18 Plerogyra turbida II/B ...... 23 Eguchipsammia fistula II/B ...... 27 Heliofungia actiniformis II/B...... 30 Hydnophora microconos II/B ...... 35 Blastomussa wellsi II/B ...... 39 Scolymia vitiensis II/B ...... 43 Mycedium elephantotus II/B ...... 47 Trachyphyllia geoffroyi II/B ...... 50 References ...... 56 Appendix ...... 61

4 Introduction This document provides a review of ten coral taxa that have been subject to long term import suspensions for Indonesia, and one coral species (Mycedium elephantotus ) for which a new 2014 quota was published retrospectively in 2015. In informal discussions in the margins of the 27 th Animals Committee Meeting in April 2014, Indonesia requested clarification on the status of imports of 12 taxa, which are all subject to EU import suspensions (H. Perier in litt . to UNEP-WCMC, 25/09/2014). Following correspondence on these long-term suspensions, Indonesia provided further information on the management of the coral harvest and trade, and the status of these species in Indonesia (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The following taxa were queried by Indonesia, three of which are considered to be synonyms by CITES; this is discussed in more detail in the individual reviews:

- Cynarina lacrymalis (reviewed for SRG70) - Catalaphyllia jardinei - Euphyllia cristata - Plerogyra sinuosa - Nemenzophyllia turbida (synonym of Plerogyra turbida ) - Dendrophyllia fistula (synonym of Eguchipsammia fistula ) - Heliofungia actiniformis - Hydnophora microconos - Blastomussa wellsi - Scolymia vitiensis - Trachyphyllia geoffroyi - Wellsophyllia radiata (synonym of Trachyphyllia geoffroyi)

It was agreed that a review by the SRG of the import suspensions for these taxa would be useful. At its 70 th meeting, the SRG decided to, in the meantime, replace the suspensions for these species with negative opinions (SRG70 SoC).

Information from the Scientific Authority of Indonesia was provided to UNEP-WCMC in 2014 and has been incorporated into these species reviews. Views from coral experts which were sought during the preparation of document SRG 70/10, including from Lyndon DeVantier (Coral Reef Research), Asuka Ishizaki (Protected Species Coordinator, Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council) and J. E. N. Veron, have also been incorporated into this report. Veron highlighted that the website ‘Corals of the World’ would be released at the end of 2014 or soon after, and that this would provide a key resource for decisions in the context of corals (J. E. N. Veron in litt . to UNEP-WCMC, 2014). As of 28/05/2015, the website was not released.

Since 2008, Indonesia has reported maricultured corals in trade as source F, in line with EU reporting, instead of reporting them as source ‘W*’, as it had done previously. It is difficult to compare the proportions of wild-sourced and maricultured coral imports before that change in reporting, as EU imports of wild-sourced corals prior to 2008 may be artificially high, due to some maricultured corals having been misreported as wild-sourced by the EU. Also since 2008, Indonesia has established Maximum Estimated Production (MEP) for coral mariculture, which generally indicated the expected production per facility and per taxon for half a year at a time. Full trade data is available here: https://db.tt/uoID7NN7 (direct trade) and https://db.tt/3FVbaFNw (indirect trade).

Coral management in Indonesia 5 A summary of the status of corals in Indonesia, the main threats affecting them, and the management actions taken is provided below, with particular focus on the management of the harvest and trade of corals in Indonesia (for a full review see UNEP-WCMC, 2014). Status and trends Indonesia was reported to have experienced a rapid decline of marine resources over the last three decades, with urgent conservation measures needed (Allen, 2008). The status of reefs (Table 2) was considered to be poorest in western Indonesia in 2000 (Dirhamsyah, 2005) and the condition of coral reefs was found to have declined over the period 2004-2008 (Wilkinson, 2008), with many reefs considered severely damaged (Scaps et al., 2007). Table 2: Some assessments of the status of Indonesian reefs over time

Reef status 2000 2011 1 2014 Poor 32.3% 30.8% 30% Fair 35.3% 36.9% 37.7% Good 25.5% 27.0% 26.8% Excellent 6.7% 5.6% 5.3% (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, (COREMAP, 2011; in: Asian 2014; in litt . to European Reference: (Dirhamsyah, 2005) Development Bank, 2014) Commission)

The Scientific Authority (SA) of Indonesia (2014; in litt . to UNEP-WCMC) believed that the condition of the reef and live coral cover had improved over the period 1993-2014, particularly since the establishment of COREMAP (The National Policy, Strategy and Action Plan) in the late 1998s (Suharsono, 2008b). COREMAP management actions were also believed to have contributed to increases in coral cover in eastern Indonesia over the period 2006-2011 (Giyanto, 2011). Threats In the mid-2000s, 70% of Indonesian coral reefs were considered to be threatened (Dirhamsyah, 2005) and the Center for Ocean Solutions (2009) later considered the majority of the coral reefs to be under “moderate to severe risk”.

Destructive fishing practices were considered the main threat to corals (Burke et al. , 2011; Dirhamsyah, 2005; Wilkinson, 2008; Center for Ocean Solutions, 2009; Turak and DeVantier, 2003; Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission), with up to 80% of coral cover destroyed in some areas by fishing with explosives (Center for Ocean Solutions, 2009). Further significant threats included offtake for trade and local uses (including construction and lime production) (Bentley, 1998; Dirhamsyah, 2005; Scaps et al. , 2007), pollution (Turak and DeVantier, 2003; Dirhamsyah, 2005; Scaps et al. , 2007), coastal construction and tourism (Dirhamsyah, 2006; Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

The damage through the harvest of marine organisms for the aquarium trade was considered to be “relatively slight” compared to other human-induced impacts (Reksodihardjo-Lilley and Lilley, 2007; Wabnitz et al. , 2003). While the illegal trade in corals globally was considered to be substantial

1 Percentage of live coral cover: ‘poor’: 0–24%; ‘fair’: 25–49%; ‘good’: 50-74%; ‘excellent’: 75–100%.

(Jones, 2008), the SA of Indonesia (2014; in litt . to UNEP-WCMC) believed that it was "almost 6 impossible", due to controls in place in Indonesia and importing countries. However, it is worth noting that importers did report some trade from Indonesia under source code I within their CITES annual reports 2003-2012.

Damage caused by natural disturbances also threaten coral reefs (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission; Wilkinson, 2008) and bleaching was considered significant, with up to 100% of bleaching of susceptible species in some areas (GCRMN, 2010). Protection and management Regulatory background The regulation of marine resources in Indonesia was considered to be complex, with 17 laws relating to coastal and marine management, 15 to ocean activities and two to the ratification of international conventions (Asian Development Bank, 2014). Several laws and regulations are relevant for the management of coral reefs (Dirhamsyah, 2006).

The regulation of coral harvest falls within the Decree of The Minister of Forestry No. 447/Kpts- II/2003, regulating inter alia the allocation of quotas, collection sites and roles of stakeholders (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission). Only live corals can be traded in Indonesia; the policy having been introduced to encourage collectors to reduce damage and mortality of harvested corals (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission).

While the governance of coastal and ocean resources was reported to lie with the State, many other agencies, departments and ministries are also involved (Asian Development Bank, 2014). Overall, the legal and non-legal instruments were considered of limited effectiveness in managing the marine and coastal resources and ecosystems (Dirhamsyah, 2005; Asian Development Bank, 2014). Protected areas The number of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that include coral reefs was estimated at 30-50 (Center for Ocean Solutions, 2009), and Wilkinson (2008) estimated that 9% of Indonesian coral reefs were within MPAs. In 2008, out of 114 actively managed MPAs overall, less than 3% were considered well-managed (Wilkinson, 2008). NOAA (2012) reported that the majority of Indonesian MPA’s lacked any management activities, although the Asian Development Bank (2014) reported much activity to focus on strengthening MPA management, including encouraging community involvement. In study of Spermonde Archipelago, Glaser et al. (2010) noted that knowledge of the protected area programme amongst local people was poor. Coral reef management The National Policy, Strategy and Action Plan, also known as ‘Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Program’ (COREMAP) (Suharsono, 2008b) started in 1998, with its last phase running until 2018 (Asian Development Bank, 2014). The project aims at sustainable use of the coral reef ecosystem (Asian Development Bank, 2014) through community awareness and education; control and surveillance; research and monitoring; community-based management; and institutional strengthening” (Suharsono, 2008a; Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission). Coral harvest Indonesia was reported to have adopted the following principles for coral harvest:

• the establishment of no-take zones (Bruckner, 2001) by prohibiting harvest within protected areas and tourism sites (Samedi and Liman, 2002);

• limiting harvest to assessed sites and allowing recovery of exploited sites (Samedi and Liman, 2002) through rotational harvest (Bruckner, 2001), with a minimum of 4 years 7 between harvest cycles (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008); • limiting harvest to immature specimens through species-specific size limits (Samedi and Liman, 2002), with a maximum of 15cm for massive corals and 25cm for branching corals (Bruckner, 2001; Indonesia CITES Management Authority, 1999; in: Wood, 2001); and conducting population monitoring (Samedi and Liman, 2002). The SA of Indonesia (2014; in litt . to UNEP-WCMC) explained that quotas were being set by the Management Authority (MA), with input from the SA and other stakeholders, including exporters.

Quotas were reported to be established based on the following assumptions: reef accretion rates are 1-1.5 cm per year, coral growth rates are 2.5-30 cm per year, and harvest occurs on approximately 30% of the reefs that are in good to excellent condition (Suharsono, 1999; in: Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). On that basis, an overall coral harvest of 1 million colonies per year was believed to represent the take of 0.00035% of the coral reef area assessed as in good to excellent condition (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008). Furthermore, Indonesia was reported to categorize coral taxa into five categories, depending on a) the size of the colonies, b) their relative frequency, c) relative dominance and d) hard coral cover; the category then stipulates the level of harvest as follows: very common (harvest allowed), common (cautious harvest), uncommon (limited harvest), rare (strictly limited harvest) and very rare (harvest prohibited) (Buckner and Suharsono 2008; based on Suharsono and Giyanto, 2006). Timotius et al. (2009) noted that over the period 1999-2007, the majority of exported wild-sourced corals were slow-growing, with faster growing corals traded at much lower levels. Fist sized corals were believed to have taken 6 months to 10 years to grow to that size (Bruckner, 2000).

Harvest sites were reported to be selected based on the province and coral abundance, with annual assessments to assist with establishing the quotas (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission). The determination of collection sites was however thought to not consider the species composition of sites (Timotius et al. , 2009).

The harvest of live corals takes place in 11 provinces (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission): Lampung, West Java, Banten, Bangka-Belitung, Central Java, East Java, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, South Sulawesi, Southeast Sulawesi and Central Sulawesi (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008; Figure 1). The SA of Indonesia (2014) reported that “Field monitoring may be done once a year in the harvest site to obtain further information in order to help determine the quota. The harvest site is determined based on the province and on coral abundance. The province-based quota is established to prevent overharvesting at a certain concentrated sites. The distribution of harvest areas will avoid overexploitation in certain sites.”

The largest collection area was reported to be located within the Spermonde archipelago in south- west Sulawesi (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The total reef area of this archipelago was estimated at 4290 km 2, and in the mid-2000s, coral covers of 15-85% were observed at sites used by coral collectors (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The average size of the corals then was 5- 24cm diameter, with only 1.5% of corals exceeding 100cm, thus making the vast majority of colonies available for collection in that area (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). Collection quotas for some species were considered to have been set too high, allowing the annual removal of 1-96% of the standing stock of individual species in the Spermonde archipelago; the authors pointed out that for some taxa there was a considerable disconnect between the harvest level and the taxon’s abundance. The IUCN recommended for a number of coral species that the effects of coral harvest for the aquarium trade be assessed in Indonesia, and highlighted the need for adequate management steps to be put in place to ensure sustainability of offtake (IUCN, 2014).

The export quotas were reported to represent 90% of the allowable harvest, allowing for some 8 losses during the collection process (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008). However, the quotas were considered to have little meaning in terms of understanding the full impact of offtake on taxa, as no records have to be kept of the actual harvest levels and losses of harvested corals through damage and mortality (Lilley, 2001). Such losses through poor handling during the trade chain were considered to be frequent in Indonesia, leading to the collection of more stock than ordered to compensate for these losses (Reksodihardjo-Lilley and Lilley, 2007).

Indonesian coral exporters are required to be part of the Indonesian coral, shell and ornamental fish association (AKKII) (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission). In 2001, AKKII was reported to have 18 licensed exporters, each of them having their own divers without middlemen and providing training in species identification, collection and handling (Bruckner, 2001). However, a study of livelihoods of coral fishermen in the Spermonde Archipelago reported that the implementation of laws and government regulations related to ornamental coral collection appeared largely dysfunctional (Ferse et al. , 2012). It was recognized that if local communities were unable to extract aquarium resources from the wild, other unsustainable human impacts on the reef would continue (Rhyne et al. , 2014). However, the authors believed that where sustainability of wild harvests cannot be achieved due to low governance capacity, mariculture should be encouraged instead (Rhyne et al. , 2014).

Mariculture The Indonesian Government is moving towards mariculture of corals (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission), aiming at completely ceasing trade in wild- sourced corals once sufficient corals can be produced through mariculture (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008). In 2007, approximately 25 facilities were reported to be actively exporting maricultured corals from Indonesia (Timotius et al. , 2009), with coral culture taking place both in land-based facilities and in the sea (Reksodihardjo-Lilley and Lilley, 2007).

Coral mariculture is regulated under the Ministry of Forestry Regulation No. P.19/Menhut-II-2005 on captive management of wild plants and animals and PHKA Regulation No. 09, January 2008 on Guidelines of Ornamental Coral Transplantation for Commercial Purposes (Timotius et al. , 2009). Regulation No. P.19/Menhut-II-2005 specifies that permits are needed for captive breeding and the export of captive-bred specimens (unofficial English translation was provided by Indonesia with their Biennial Report in 2007). The same regulation requires coral traders to return 10% of propagated corals to their natural habitats - this policy was believed not yet be fully implemented (Asian Development Bank, 2014). Mariculture operations are subject to biannual inspections, with poor performance over two assessments resulting in mariculture permits being revoked (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt . to European Commission). Operations that successfully mariculture a new species were reported to be allocated the full export quota for a period of two years (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; in litt. to European Commission).

Since 2008, Indonesia has established Maximum Estimated Production (MEP) figures for coral mariculture, which represent the expected production per facility and per taxon for half a year at a time. The MEP figures were reported to be calculated on the basis of maximum breeding success and the number of adult breeding stock, and distributed among companies through the AKKII (Timotius et al. , 2009).

9

1: Aceh 16: East Kalimantan/ North Kalimantan 2: Bali 17: Lampung 3: Bangka-Belitung 18: Maluku 4: Banten 19: North Maluku 5: Bengkulu 20: West Nusa Tenggara 6: Gorontalo 21: East Nusa Tenggara 7: Papua/West Papua 22: Riau 8: Jakarta 23: South Sulawesi/West Sumatra 9: Jambi 24: Central Sulawesi 10: West Java 25: Southeast Sulawesi 11: Central Java 26: North Sulawesi 12: East Java 27: West Sumatra 13: West Kalimantan 28: South Sumatra Indicates provinces where coral collection takes place (based on Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008). 14: South Kalimantan 29: North Sumatra 15: Central Kalimantan 30: Yogyakarta Figure 1: Indonesia, based on UN map No. 4110 Rev. 4, and provinces as of 25/10/2012.

10 SCLERACTINIA: CARYOPHYLLIDAE

Catalaphyllia jardinei II/B

SYNONYMS : Pectinia jardinei

COMMON NAMES: Elegant Coral

RANGE STATES: Australia, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Viet Nam UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild specimens (excluding maricultured specimens) from Indonesia formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens first applied on 19/09/1999 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. The suspension has excluded maricultured specimens since 18/02/2005.

Current positive opinion for wild specimens from Australia formed on 03/12/2010 and confirmed on 02/12/2011.

Current no opinion for Fiji formed on 15/01/2004 replacing negative opinion formed on 22/05/2003.

Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Solomon Islands first applied on 10/05/2006 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinion formed on 09/10/2003.

Negative opinion for wild specimens from Tonga formed on 22/04/2005 and removed on 12/06/2006.

IUCN: Vulnerable

Trade patterns Between 2003 and 2014, Indonesia published CITES export quotas every year for wild-sourced Catalaphyllia jardinei (Table 3). Quotas for wild specimens have generally been declining, with the lowest quota of 19 000 published in 2013 and 2014. Trade appears to have remained within quota for most years for wild-sourced corals, except in 2012 and 2013, according to data reported by Indonesia. Additionally, in 2005 and 2007, Indonesia published CITES export quotas for maricultured C. jardinei (Table 3). The zero quota in 2007 for maricultured C. jardinei appears to have been exceeded, according to data reported by the importer (the United States of America); a permit check appears to suggest that the Indonesian export permit was issued in 2007.

Direct exports of C. jardinei from Indonesia comprised moderate levels of trade to the EU and very high levels of trade to the rest of the world 2004-2013; trade was mainly in live, wild-sourced individuals exported for commercial purposes (Table 4, Figure 1). Small amounts of source ‘I’ trade (123 specimens) were also reported by importers in this period. In addition, very small volumes of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes and source ‘U’ trade for commercial purposes were also reported 2004-2013.

Indirect exports of C. jardinei originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 consisted of very low levels of live, wild-sourced corals exported for commercial purposes, mainly via the United States of 11 America (Table 5).

Table 3: CITES export quotas exports for Catalaphyllia jardinei (in number of pieces) from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia, 2004-2013. Trade data for 2014 are not yet available. ‘Mariculture’ includes source C, F and R (no trade in sources F and R was reported in 2005 and 2007).

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

WILD Quota 27500 26500 26500 26500 23850 26500 25000 22500 20000 19000 19000 Live Importer 20339 22031 23877 20990 15940 15075 21715 12971 13273 11785 Exporter 22820 25108 25498 26443 23842 26289 24853 20802 21147 24386 Raw corals Importer 1586 158 54 281 2568 3460 3012 2321 1621 875 Exporter MARICULTURE Quota 1000 0 Live & Importer 25 6 15 13 45 21 272 Raw Exporter 721 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015

Table 4: Main direct commercial exports of Catalaphyllia jardinei from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. ‘Mariculture’ includes sources C, F and R’.

Importer Term (unit) Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU W Importer 1000 live (kg) Exporter live mariculture Importer 60 Exporter 140 W Importer 30 30 58 15 40 10 15 24 Exporter 142 204 188 231 153 279 203 130 409 109 W Importer 10 raw corals Exporter RoW W Importer 67 7 30 live (kg) Exporter live mariculture Importer 25 6 15 13 40 21 200 Exporter 581 W Importer 20309 21996 23819 20975 15900 15075 21705 12971 13258 11761 Exporter 22678 24901 25310 26212 23689 26010 24650 20672 20738 24277 mariculture Importer 5 12 raw corals Exporter W Importer 1586 158 54 271 2568 3460 3012 2321 1621 875 Exporter Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015

Table 5: Indirect exports of Catalaphyllia jardinei originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013 (No trade was reported in 2004 or 2010-2013).

Reported by 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Importer 45 5 50 Exporter 1 2 8 19 3 33 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015

EU trade restriction 12 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 1: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Catalaphyllia jardinei from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers . Conservation status The genus Catalaphyllia contains only one species: C. jardinei , which is zooxanthellate [symbiotic with microalgae] (Veron, 2000) and ahermatypic [not a main contributor to the reef matrix] (Atkinson et al. , 2008b). Colonies are either free living or attached (Borneman, 2002) and mature colonies can reach 100 cm in diameter (Wood, 1983). C. jardinei was reported to occur in shallow, tropical reef environments (Turak et al. , 2008d) and in protected, often turbid water (Veron, 2000). The depth range of the species was reported to be 0-40 m (Turak et al. , 2008d). Some authors considered C. jardinei to be a habitat specialist (Atkinson et al. , 2008a; Roelofs and Silcock, 2008), preferring soft bottom habitats such as seagrass beds, algal flats and sandy or muddy substrates (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008; Bruckner and Borneman, 2006) and at areas at river mouths (Lilley, 2001). Turak et al. (2008d) reported that the species occurred in a variety of reef biotypes, although being especially common on soft substrates, rather than in areas of dense coral growth.

C. jardinei is gonochorous (individuals are unisexual) (Wabnitz et al. , 2003). The age at sexual maturity was assumed to be three to eight years (Turak et al. , 2008d), based on most reef building corals having been reported to reach maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999). The average generation length was assumed to be 10 years (Turak et al. , 2008d). C. jardinei was observed to be slow growing, with linear growth rate estimates of 0.8-15.2 cm per year (Green and Shirley, 1999).

C. jardinei was reported to be widespread in the Indo-West Pacific and oceanic west Pacific (Turak et al. , 2008d).

The species was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN (Turak et al ., 2008d). Re-assessment in 10 years was considered important, due to predicted threats from climate change and ocean acidification (Turak et al ., 2008d). Veron (2000) reported C. jardinei to be seldom common and rare in the western Indian Ocean. Turak et al . (2008d) also reported it as rare.

Harvesting for the aquarium trade was reported as a threat to C. jardinei (Turak et al ., 2008d). The species was identified as one of the seven most popular coral species in trade (Wabnitz et al. , 2003) particularly as it is colourful with large polyps (Green and Shirley, 1999). In aquaria, C. jardinei was considered to “survive robustly” (Green and Shirley, 1999), with low mortality reported (Wabnitz et al., 2003). It was assessed as having moderate vulnerability to harvesting (Suharsano and Bruckner, 2008) and it was noted that the species was conspicuous and easily identified (Turak et al ., 2008d).

In addition to the global threats to corals posed by climate change, localised threats to coral reef communities were reported to include pollution, invasive species, changing native species 13 dynamics, as well as human development activities, however, the combined threats to the global population of C. jardinei were reported to be unknown (Turak et al ., 2008d). C. jardinei was reported to have low susceptibility to coral bleaching compared with other species (Roelofs and Silcock, 2008).

Indonesia: The distribution of C. jardinei in Indonesia was mapped by Suharsono (2008a) who reported it to be scattered throughout Indonesian waters. C. jardinei was reported from Banten (western Java) (Suharsono, 2008a), Central Java, East Java, West Java, East Nusa Tenggara (Komodo, Rinca), West Nusa Tenggara (Lombok), Bangka-Belitung Islands (off Sumatra), Lampung (south Sumatra) (Lilley, 2001), West Sumatra (Suharsono, 2008a), Southeast Sulawesi (Turak and DeVantier, 2011), South Sulawesi (Spermonde Reefs, Take Bonarate), Central Sulawesi (Lilley, 2001), and North Sulawesi (Scaps et al. , 2007). It was also reported from Bali (Turak and DeVantier, 2011), Maluku province (Ambon Island) (Lilley, 2001), and West Papua (Suharsono, 2008a). Suharsono (2008a) reported that it was found in the Kendari area where suitable habitat was abundant (Southeast Sulawesi).

Bentley (1998) reported C. jardinei to be uncommon across Indonesia. It was reported to be the dominant species on Amulewang Reef (Central Sulawesi) in the Banda Sea on shallow reef flats among seagrass beds (Lilley, 2001) but was reported as rare in the Spermonde Archipelago (South Sulawesi) (Yusuf and Rani, 2006 in Yusuf and Jompa, 2012). Donnelly et al . (2003) reported C. jardinei from two of 51 sites surveyed at Raja Ampat Islands (Papua) in 2002, but McKenna et al . (2002) had not recorded the species during a survey of 45 sites in the same region. Whilst the species was observed in the Lembeh strait (North Sulawesi), it was not observed during a survey of 21 sites in the same area and considered rare (Scaps et al ., 2007). It was reported from each of five sites surveyed in Nusalaut Island (Maluku) (Souhoka, 2009) and from one of 29 dives sites in Wakatobi (Southeast Sulawesi) (Hoeksema, 2003).

The species was reported to be easily harvested from areas, where it was found to grow partly embedded in soft substrate (Lilley, 2001). It was mainly collected from deep-water sites where the species grows as small free-living colonies (Borneman, 2002). A green variety from Lampung (Sumatra) was reported to be particularly sought after (Lilley, 2001).

Bruckner and Borneman (2006) believed that the harvest quota for C. jardinei did not allow for sustainable levels of harvest in the Spermonde region (South Sulawesi). This area was reported to be one of the four main ornamental coral collection sites in Indonesia (Ferse et al. , 2012). In an assessment of coral resources in East Belitung (off Sumatra) presented at a conference, a quota of 1000 colonies was mentioned for the province, but C. jardinei was noted not to have been recorded during dive surveys (Johan et al. , 2014).

C. jardinei was reported to difficult to propagate and captive-propagated specimens were considered to be extremely uncommon (Wood et al. , 2012; Borneman, 2008). Suharsono (2014) contains images of C. jardinei apparently in mariculture but provides no further information on locations, quantities or mariculture of the species in Indonesia.

At its 25 th meeting, the Animals Committee (AC) included C. jardinei (all range States) in the Review of Significant Trade process (AC25 Summary Record). Following the consultation process, Indonesia was not retained in the review (AC26 Summary Record).

14 SCLERACTINIA: Caryophylliidae Euphyllia cristata II/B

COMMON NAMES: White Grape Coral

RANGE STATES: American Samoa, Australia, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Taiwan, Province of China, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for Euphyllia cristata (excluding maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014 and current no opinion i) for Euphyllia spp. raw corals formed on 07/11/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) for Indonesia applied on 10/05/2006 (excluding maricultured specimens) and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous positive opinion formed on 22/07/1997 but replaced by a negative opinion on 11/07/2000.

Current positive opinion for Australia and Fiji formed on 22/07/1997 and confirmed on 07/11/2014.

Current no opinion i) for American Samoa formed on 07/11/2014. Previous positive opinion formed on 22/07/1997.

Current no opinion i) for Japan, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Taiwan, Province of China, Vanuatu and Viet Nam formed on 02/12/2011 and confirmed on 07/11/2014. Previous positive opinion for these countries formed on 22/07/1997.

Current positive opinion for raw corals of Euphyllia spp. from Australia formed on 07/11/2014, and current no opinion i) for raw corals of Euphyllia spp. formed on 07/11/2014 for American Samoa, Australia, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Djibouti, Guam, India, Israel, Japan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States of), Myanmar, New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Oman, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Seychelles, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, Vanuatu, Viet Nam.

IUCN: VU

Trade patterns Euphyllia cristata was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of E. cristata reported by Indonesia have been between 25,000-32,000 live wild specimens per year during the period 2004-2013 and trade has been within or close to the quota in most years (Table 6).

The quota for E. cristata has decreased from 30,100 wild pieces in 2004 to 23,000 in 2014. However, the total reported exports of 29,370 live wild pieces in 2013 appears to have exceeded the quota of 23,500 pieces for that year by almost 6000 pieces (Table 6). However, this apparent quota excess may be due to Indonesia reporting on the basis of permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a quota of 2400 pieces of E. cristata from mariculture in 2005 and a zero quota for mariculture specimens in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since 15 then, although some trade in mariculture specimens has been reported with relatively high levels in 2013 (Table 7). The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) indicated that E. cristata has been successfully cultured.

Table 6: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Euphyllia cristata from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Quota (wild) 30100 30100 30100 30100 27900 32000 29500 28000 25000 23500 23000 Importer 27378 31432 26698 27246 26767 23279 18013 16648 14832 12341 Exporter 25814 27535 29227 30029 27829 31735 29337 26745 25772 29370

Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2004-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade suspension being in place (Table 7, Figure 2). Relatively low levels of trade in source ‘I’ specimens were reported by importers during this period (218 specimens). Very small volumes of wild sourced commercial trade in raw corals to the EU were also reported by importers (24 raw corals). Wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes and commercial trade in sources other than W, C and F was also reported at low levels.

Table 7: Main direct commercial exports of Euphyllia cristata from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live mariculture Exporter 50 1248 Importer 39 573 W Exporter 265 618 401 185 185 309 344 245 172 165 Importer 149 92 35 48 41 8 11 38 RoW live mariculture Exporter 150 5396 Importer 34 10 36 20 226 626 W (kg) Exporter Importer 19 30 W Exporter 25549 26917 28826 29844 27644 31426 28993 26500 25600 29205 Importer 27229 31340 26663 27246 26719 23279 17972 16640 14821 12303 W Exporter raw corals Importer 1247 23 146 508 1885 2264 2593 2273 1905 1179

Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Indirect exports of E. cristata originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild and captive-born corals re-exported for commercial purposes, primarily via the United States of America (Table 8).

Jones (2008) suggested that the genus Euphyllia was the fourth most confiscated coral genus in the UK during the period 2000-2007.

Table 8: Indirect exports of live Euphyllia cristata originating in Indonesia to the 16 EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was in live corals for commercial purposes. Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 F Exporter 10 Importer 14 10 W Exporter 3 5 52 20 Importer 7 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. EU trade restriction 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 2: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Euphyllia cristata from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers . Conservation status Euphyllia cristata is a reef building coral (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014) found in shallow reef environments (Veron, 2000), usually existing in small colonies at depths of 1-35 m (Turak et al. , 2014b). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef- building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

Widespread throughout its range, it was reported to be both rare and moderately common by Turak et al. (2014b), and uncommon but conspicuous by Veron (2000). The species was categorised as being globally common in Veron (2014), on the basis of semi-quantitative data on relative abundance from 2984 individual survey sites in 30 ecoregions across the Indo-west Pacific from 1994 to 2012. However, the overall assessment of the species by Veron, based on his extensive experience, was that it was globally uncommon (Veron, 2014). Differences between the two estimates are likely to be due to the species being relatively abundant in specific ecoregions which can affect semi-quantitative records (Veron, 2014).

The species was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN in 2014 (Turak et al . 2014b). Specific population trends are unknown, however, there is evidence of declines in the extent and quality of coral reef habitat which has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Turak et al ., 2014b). The estimated habitat degradation and loss of 36% over three generation lengths (30 years) is the best inference of population reduction (Turak et al ., 2014b).

Turak et al . (2014b) reported that E. cristata was heavily harvested for the aquarium trade. The species was reported to be particularly susceptible to bleaching, disease, and other threats (Turak et al ., 2014b). However, other authors considered the genus to have a relatively low susceptibility to coral bleaching (Wilson et al ., 2012; Roelofs and Silcock, 2008). Rachello-Dolmen and Cleary

(2007) considered Euphyllia species to be “stress tolerators”, able to occur in areas of high sedimentation or eutrophication. 17

Indonesia : E. cristata was reported have a relatively wide distribution throughout Indonesian waters (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; Suharsono, 2008a). It was reported to be found in shallow waters to depths of more than 20 m; it can be found in clear waters to turbid ones close to estuaries (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The species has been found in Bali and adjacent regions, including Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara Province), Wakatobi (South Sulawesi), Derewan (East Kalimantan) and Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi) (Turak and deVantier, 2011). Lilley (2001) referred to four areas in which the species was known to occur: Komodo and Rinca, Sumbawa, and Lombok, all of which are in East Nusa Tenggara province.

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of E. cristata in Indonesia:

• In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984 (Best et al ., 1989), E. cristata was found at two: north-east Komodo and Sumbawa. • During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, E. cristata was found in five of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007). • E. cristata was not encountered in Jakarta Bay in 1920 and 2005 but it was observed in the offshore Thousand Islands archipelago in 2005 (van der Meij et al ., 2010). • The species was reported to occur in the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, and Eastern Indonesia (Veron, 2002, in: McKenna et al ., 2002). However, during a rapid ecological assessment in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and E. cristata was found at none (McKenna et al ., 2002). During another rapid ecological assessment in 2002 a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and E. cristata was found at 21 (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • In Bunaken National Park, the species was found in 23% of the 39 sites surveyed in 2003 (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

The species was considered to be common in sheltered areas by the Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) whereas it was described as rare, scattered across the waters of Indonesia by Suharsono (2008a). Best et al ., (1989) described it an “uncommon species adapted to soft bottom conditions”. In Bunaken National Park, it was considered to have a moderately widespread local distribution and was thought likely to form locally-reproductive populations (Turak and DeVantier, 2003). Raymakers (2001) reported densities of E. cristata of 0-1/100 m 2 in Spermonde (South Sulawesi). Bruckner and Borneman (2006) found that the density of E. cristata in an area of 1760 km 2 in the Spermonde Archipelago was 0-0.01/m 2, with a population estimate of 10,000. Bruckner and Borneman (2006) reported that there were an estimated 1.8 million Euphyllia colonies within Spermonde, however, abundance of individual species was highly variable and only two species were common enough to support collection at existing quotas. E. cristata was identified at only a single site and collection of the allowable quota would amount to approximately 70% of the entire population (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The authors estimated that 85% of colonies were within the legal size range as established by Indonesia and it was assumed that 90% of the allocated quota is taken (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006).

Raymakers (2001) categorised E. cristata as one of the ‘most threatened species’ in Indonesia (of those reviewed by that author) due to their scarcity and a high export quota. The author suggested that imports should not be permitted until there are scientific estimates of the population status in collection areas and proper management in place (Raymakers, 2001).

Nine species in the genus Euphyllia are reported to occur in Indonesia (Species+, speciesplus.net, 2015). However, much of the information in the scientific literature refers to the genus but does not provide information on which species is being referred to (e.g. Jompa et al ., 2007; Lilley, 2001; Putra et al ., 2014; Scaps & Runtukahu, 2008; Siringoringo et al ., 2006; Suharsono and Giyanto, 2006).

18 SCLERACTINIA: Caryophylliidae Plerogyra sinuosa II/B

SYNONYMS : Euphyllia sinuosa, Plerogyra laxa

COMMON NAMES: Bladder Coral

RANGE STATES: American Samoa, Australia, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Djibouti, Egypt, Fiji, Guam, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, Tonga (uncertain), United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous no opinion i) formed on 07/11/2014. Previous positive opinion formed on 22/07/1997, replaced by a negative opinion for Plerogyra spp. on 11/07/2000 and Article 4.6(b) suspension (except maricultured specimens) from 18/02/2005, last confirmed on 04/09/2014.

Current positive opinion for Australia formed on 22/07/1997 and last confirmed on 07/11/2014.

Current positive opinion for Fiji formed on 15/01/2004 and confirmed on 07/11/2014. Previous positive opinion formed on 22/07/1997, replaced by a negative opinion formed on 22/05/2003.

Current no opinion i) formed on 02/12/2011 and confirmed on 07/11/2014 for American Samoa, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Djibouti, Egypt, Guam, India, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Viet Nam. Previous positive opinions for these countries formed on 22/07/1997.

Current no opinion i) for the Solomon Islands formed on 28/05/2013 and confirmed on 07/11/2014. Previous positive opinion formed on 22/07/1997.

Current positive opinion for raw corals of Plerogyra spp. from Australia formed on 07/11/2014 and current no opinion i) for raw corals of Plerogyra spp. formed on 07/11/2014 for American Samoa, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Djibouti, Egypt, Guam, India, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Viet Nam.

Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension for Tonga applied on 03/09/2008. Previous negative opinion formed on 25/07/2005.

IUCN: NT

Trade patterns 19 The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of Plerogyra sinuosa reported by Indonesia have typically been between 20,000 and 30,000 live wild pieces each year, and generally within quota (Table 9).

The quota for P. sinuosa has decreased from 29,000 wild pieces in 2004 to 23,000 in 2014. However, the quotas established for 2012 and 2013, were exceeded according to trade reported by Indonesia (Table 9, Figure 3). The total reported exports of 30,332 live wild pieces in 2013 were higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and appeared to have exceeded the quota of 23,500 pieces for that year by nearly 7000 pieces. However, this apparent quota excess may be due to Indonesia reporting on the basis of permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a quota of 1000 pieces of P. sinuosa from mariculture in 2005 and a zero quota for mariculture specimens in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, although very low level trade in mariculture specimens has been reported in several years (Table 10).

Table 9: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Plerogyra sinuosa from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Quota (wild) 29000 28000 28000 28000 25650 28500 28500 28500 25000 23500 23000 Exporter 22931 25510 26195 27838 25576 28159 28371 27284 25791 30332 Importer 23489 27760 24007 25122 21755 21423 18941 20113 19120 16602 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2004-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade suspension being in place (Table 10). Relatively low levels of trade in source ‘I’ specimens were reported by importers during this period (222 specimens). In addition, very small amounts of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes, trade in source ‘unknown’ and wild sourced trade in raw corals to the EU were also reported.

Jones (2008) reported that Plerogyra was the second most confiscated coral genus in the UK during the period 2000-2007.

Table 10: Main direct commercial exports of Plerogyra sinuosa from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live mariculture Exporter 120 Importer 80 W Exporter 346 315 246 193 146 264 116 201 259 199 Importer 131 24 8 15 25 105 86 82 RoW live mariculture Exporter 220 Importer 85 10 7 8 15 17 8 65 3013 W Exporter 22585 25186 25949 27645 25430 27895 28255 27083 25532 3 Importer 23358 27704 23999 25107 21755 21398 18931 20008 19034 1652

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20 0 raw corals mariculture Exporter Importer 6 W Exporter Importer 1694 35 76 308 1786 2210 2198 2157 1488 1122 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Indirect exports of P. sinuosa originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, primarily via Malaysia (Table 11).

Table 11: Indirect exports of live Plerogyra sinuosa originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 1 23 95 18 Importer 7 30 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 3: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Plerogyra sinuosa from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004- 2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Conservation status Plerogyra sinuosa is a reef-building coral with a colony size varying from 10 cm to more than 1 m across (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). It is found in protected reef environments, especially, but not necessarily, in turbid water (Veron, 2000). It occurs in depths of 3-35 m (Turak et al ., 2014a). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef- building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Near Threatened by the IUCN in 2014 (Turak et al . 2014a). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, with about 20% reefs already destroyed, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Turak et al ., 2014a).

Veron (2000) described the species as “usually uncommon” and Turak et al . (2014a) reported that “it is widespread and common throughout its range and therefore is likely to be more resilient to habitat loss and reef degradation because of an assumed large effective population size”.

The main threat to P. sinuosa was reported to be extensive habitat loss due to a combination of threats, and it is also heavily harvested for the aquarium trade (Turak et al ., 2014a). In a study of 21 the impact of the 2010 coral bleaching event in Wakatobi National Park, Wilson et al. (2012) classified the genus Plerogyra as relatively “resistant” to bleaching events.

It was reported to be a slow growing species and difficult to propagate, and limited success in mariculture has been reported (Wabnitz et al. , 2003; Wood et al. , 2012).

Indonesia : P. sinuosa was reported to be widely distributed throughout Indonesian waters (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; Suharsono, 2008a). It is commonly found on reef slopes more than five meters deep, preferring crevices or small hanging walls (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). While large colonies were reported to be frequently found on flat substrates or small slopes, the corals in trade are mostly small (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014).

P. sinuosa has been found in Bali and adjacent regions, including Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara Province), Wakatobi (South Sulawesi), Derewan (East Kalimantan) and Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi) (Turak and deVantier, 2011). It was found in the waters of Padang, West Sumatra, based on the collection of Bung Hatta University (Jonker and Johan, 1999). P. sinuosa was considered to have a widespread local distribution in Bunaken National Park and likely to form locally-reproductive populations (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of P. sinuosa in Indonesia:

• In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984, P. sinuosa was found at five: north-east Komodo, Sumbawa, Taka Bone Rate, Salayer, south-west Sulawesi (Best et al ., 1989). • During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at the Togean and Banggai Islands in Sulawesi in 1998, a total of 47 sites were visited and P. sinuosa was found at 14 (Allen and McKenna, 2001). • During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and P. sinuosa was found at 12 (McKenna et al ., 2002). In 2002, a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and P. sinuosa was found at 18 (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • P. sinuosa was not encountered in Jakarta Bay in 1920 and 2005 but it was observed in the offshore Thousand Islands archipelago in 2005 (van der Meij et al ., 2010). • During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, Plerogyra sinuosa was found in 10 of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007). • During a study in 2007 in five locations at Nusalaut Island, Central Maluku District, P. sinuosa was found at four (Souhoka, 2009). • In Bunaken National Park in North Sulawesi, the species was found in 56% of the 39 sites surveyed in 2003 (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

Four species in the genus Plerogyra are reported to occur in Indonesia (Species+, 2015). However, much of the information in the scientific literature refers to the genus but does not provide information on which species is being referred to. This includes the following information:

• Raymakers (2001) reported densities of Plerogyra spp. of 8-19/100 m 2 in Spermonde (South Sulawesi) and 33/100 m 2 in Lampung (South Sumatra). The market size of specimens was 5-10 cm, and the wild size was <50 cm (Raymakers, 2001). The author categorised Plerogyra spp. as ‘threatened to a lesser extent’ (of those reviewed by that author) with a low estimated abundance – 20-50 colonies/m 2 - and a high export quota. • Referring to the genus Plerogyra, Bruckner and Borneman (2006) stated that the density in an area of 1760 km 2 in the Spermonde Archipelago was 0.08-0.19/m 2, with a population estimate of 227,000.

• In three sites in Wakatobi Marine Park in south-east Sulawesi, Crabbe and Smith (2003) 22 found Plerogyra to be abundant at 10 and 15 m at Hoga and Kaledupa, but not at Sampela at 10 m. They suggested that this might be as a result of increased sedimentation at Sampela, which was not favourable to Plerogyra . • During a survey of four sites in Bali (Hoeksema and Putra, 2000), Plerogyra spp. was found in two. • In Lampung Bay, Lilley (2001) indicated that the estimated population density of Plerogyra spp. was 33 colonies per 100 m 2 for sizes smaller than 50 cm and suggested that the genus may be common in Lampung Bay. • Plerogyra was considered to be a rare genus in the vicinity of Kapoposang Island during a study in 1996 (Yusuf and Rani, 2006, in: Yusuf and Jompa, 2012). • Using a methodology based on size of colony and frequency of occurrence, Suharsono and Giyanto (2006) described Plerogyra as rare in Bakauheni, Kepulauan Seribu and Teluk Cendrawasih suggesting that harvest should be strictly limited; they described it as very rare in Jepara suggesting that harvest should be prohibited.

Lilley (2001) noted that corals are collected from many sites throughout the archipelago and the sites at which live corals are harvested, are chosen very selectively by the collectors. The genus Plerogyra has been recorded in collection sites in Bali, Sumatra, Java, Sulawesi and West Timor (Lilley, 2001).

SCLERACTINIA: Caryophylliidae 23 Plerogyra turbida II/B

SYNONYMS : Nemenzophyllia turbida

COMMON NAMES: Jasmine Coral

RANGE STATES: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS : Current negative opinion for Plerogyra turbida (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous negative opinion for Plerogyra spp. formed on 11/07/2000 and replaced with an Article 4.6(b) suspension on 18/02/2005, last confirmed on 04/09/2014.

Current positive opinion for raw corals of Plerogyra spp. from Australia formed on 07/11/2014 and current no opinion i) for raw corals of Plerogyra spp. formed on 07/11/2014 for American Samoa, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Djibouti, Egypt, Guam, India, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Viet Nam.

IUCN: VU

Taxonomic note Nemenzophyllia turbida is considered by CITES to be a synonym of Plerogyra turbida (UNEP- WCMC, 2012). However, the name Nemenzophyllia turbida is used by Veron (2000), Cairns et al. (1999), the Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014), IUCN (Turak et al. , 2008) and a number of other authors. Veron (2000) recognised N. turbida, noting that he had formerly placed the species in the genus Plerogyra . Veron (2000) also stated that if further research suggests that Plerogyra discus is the same species, then Plerogyra would once again be applicable. Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia.

Exports of P. turbida reported by Indonesia have been approximately 12,000-14,000 live wild pieces each year (Table 12), and generally within quota. However, in 2013, according to trade reported by Indonesia, the quota of 12,000 appeared to be exceeded by 2,413 pieces (Table 12) and the total exports of 14,413 live wild pieces in 2013 are higher than exports in any of the previous nine years. However, this apparent quota excess may be due to Indonesia reporting on the basis of permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported. Up until 2012, Indonesia published quotas using the synonym N. turbida , but in 2013 and 2014, quotas were issued using the name P. turbida . Raymakers (2001) noted that during interviews, collectors and traders stated that the two species can be identified without a doubt.

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2004-2013 by both Indonesia 24 and EU countries, despite the trade suspension being in place (Table 13, Figure 4). Relatively low levels of trade in source ‘I’ specimens were reported by importers during this period (195 specimens). Small quantities of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes were also traded in this period. In addition, low levels of commercial trade in sources other than W, C and F were also reported.

Table 12: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Plerogyra turbida from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Quota (wild ) 14000 14000 14000 14000 11700 12610 12610 12610 12000 12000 11000 Exporter 13269 12954 13280 13928 11661 12352 12558 10987 12929 14413

Importer 9000 7462 8392 7372 5534 4032 21209 2189 1899 551

Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Table 13: Main direct commercial exports of Plerogyra turbida from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live mariculture Exporter 120 Importer 33 W Exporter 65 117 101 130 110 338 1445 387 970 397 Importer 5 5 5 5 14 39 10 9 31 RoW live W (kg) Exporter Importer 20 W Exporter 13204 12834 13179 13798 11551 12014 11113 10600 11959 14016 Importer 8995 7437 8387 7367 5520 4032 21130 2179 1890 520 mariculture Exporter Importer 68 raw corals mariculture Exporter Importer 42 W Exporter Importer 526 100 154 89 1137 1548 2726 2341 2568 1666 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Indirect exports of P. turbida originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, via Malaysia and Singapore (Table 14).

Table 14: Indirect exports of live Plerogyra turbida originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Grand Total Exporter 9 5 14 Importer 2 2 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 30000 25 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 4: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Plerogyra turbida from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

CITES trade should be reported using the accepted CITES nomenclature. However, the majority of trade in this species was reported using the synonym Nemenzophyllia turbida . Of 3,334 individual shipment records for 2010-2013, 96 were reported using the name Plerogyra turbida with the remainder (97%) reported using the synonym, N. turbida . While trade to the EU was low level, the majority of shipments imported were accepted using the name N. turbida. Conservation status Plerogyra turbida was reported to be found in shallow, tropical reef environments, in turbid or sheltered reef environments from 8-30 m (Turak et al ., 2008b). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species [ N. turbida ] was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN in 2008 (Turak et al . 2008b). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, of 38% over three generation lengths, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Turak et al ., 2008b). Turak et al. (2008b) described the species [ N. turbida ] as “widespread and rare throughout its range” and suggested that it may “form very large carpets and can be locally abundant”. It was described as “rare, but conspicuous” by Veron (2000) and Turak et al. (2008b).

P. turbida was reported to be heavily harvested for the aquarium trade and has suffered an extensive reduction of coral reef habitat due to a combination of threats (Turak et al ., 2008b). This species is particularly susceptible to bleaching, disease, and other threats (Turak et al ., 2008b). In a study of the impact of the 2010 coral bleaching event in Wakatobi National Park, Wilson et al. (2012) classified the genus Plerogyra as relatively “resistant” to bleaching events.

Indonesia: The species [ N. turbida ] was reported to be widespread across Indonesia, with its preferred habitat on offshore reefs, typically having a gentle slope ranging from 150 to horizontal (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). It occurs in depths of more than 15 meters with a sandy or muddy substrate and low light intensity (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). It was reported to have a “clumped” distribution pattern, with occasional large patches of the species; colonies are usually less than 100 cm across but occasionally form very large stand reefs which consist mostly of a single species (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014).

The distribution map provided in Suharsono (2008a) indicates that P. turbida occurs only in 26 eastern Indonesia, from Sulawesi eastwards. However, it was reported from collecion sites in the following areas: Bali Strait; South Sumatra; North Sumatra; South Sulawesi; West Bali; West Timor; West Java; West Java; East Java; Jawa Island, Central Java (Lilley, 2001). The species [N. turbida ] has also been found in Derewan (Turak and deVantier, 2011) and the Spermonde Archipelago, South Sulawesi (Raymakers, 2001).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of P. turbida in Indonesia:

• In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984 (Best et al ., 1989), P. turbida was found at one, north-east Komodo. • During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001 (McKenna et al ., 2002), a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and P. turbida was not recorded. However, the authors noted that the species did occur in eastern Indonesia, as reported by Veron (2000). • During another rapid ecological assessment at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2002 (Donnelly et al. , 2003) a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and P. turbida was found at two.

The species considered to be rare by Suharsono (2008a). It was considered to be rare in the vicinity of Kapoposang Island in the Spermonde Archipelago during a study in 1996 (Yusuf and Rani, 2006, in: Yusuf and Jompa, 2012). Raymakers (2001) categorised [ N. turbida ] as threatened to a lesser extent (of those reviewed by that author), with a low estimated abundance – 20-50 colonies/m 2 and a high export quota.

In the Spermonde Archipelago, the species [ N. turbida ] was found at depths of 30 m at a density of 220-790 colonies/100 m2 (Raymakers, 2001). Raymakers (2001) noted that the maximum allowable depth for diving is about 20 m, which prevents scientists from surveying certain sites, such as the largest patches of P. sinuosa [N. turbida ] which have been observed at depths of 30-35 m in the Spermonde Archipelago. Bruckner and Borneman (2006) undertook a survey of 12 locations in the Spermonde Archipelago in Southwest Sulawesi, an area with approximately 150 islands which they reported was the largest coral collection area in Indonesia. They found that the species [ N. turbida ] formed isolated, low-relief coral mounds in deeper (30-35 m) soft-bottom nearshore locations (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). Two patches were found in their study, each about 100-300 m x 100 m wide, with densities of 5-8 colonies/m 2 within the densest part of the patch and an estimated maximum of 10,000 colonies in each patch (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The authors suggested that if these were the only populations of this species in Spermonde, annual harvest of 3000 colonies could represent up to 30% of the total population (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). However, based on the extensive nature of deep, nearshore soft- bottom environments and the distance between the patches surveyed in this study, they estimated that the total population may exceed 800,000 colonies, in which case the annual harvest would represent up to 0.4% of the total population (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The authors also noted reports from coral collectors which indicated that several other aggregates exist in similar environments (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006).

Corals in trade are small, under 15 cm across (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014) to 21 cm (Raymakers, 2001).

SCLERACTINIA: Dendrophylliidae 27

Eguchipsammia fistula II/B

SYNONYMS : Dendrophyllia fistula , Balanophyllia fistula

RANGE STATES: Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mozambique, New Zealand, Philippines, United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, United States

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension for wild-sourced applied on 10/09/2012 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion formed on 14/09/2007 and confirmed on 02/12/2011. IUCN: Not yet assessed.

Taxonomic note The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) uses the name Dendrophyllia fistula, which is considered by CITES to be a synonym of Eguchipsammia fistula (UNEP-WCMC, 2012), based on Cairns et al. (1999). Similarly, Cairns (2014) considered D. fistula to be a synonym of E. fistula . Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of Eguchipsammia fistula reported by Indonesia have been approximately 16,000-18,000 live wild pieces each year, and generally within quota (Table 15). However, no trade was reported by Indonesia in 2011 and 2012.

The quota for E. fistula has decreased from 19,500 wild pieces in 2004 to 15,000 in 2014. In 2013, according to trade reported by Indonesia, the quota of 15,000 appeared to be exceeded by over 3000 pieces (Table 15). However, this apparent quota excess may be due to Indonesia reporting on the basis of permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a zero export quota for pieces of E. fistula from mariculture in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, and some very low trade in mariculture specimens has been reported (Table 16).

Table 15: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Eguchipsammia fistula from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Quota (wild) 19500 19500 19500 19500 18900 18900 18900 18900 15500 15000 15000 Exporter 16388 18271 18893 19334 18859 18630 18831 18158 Importer 8479 11453 10790 10690 4198 3055 4823 4078 2865 469 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

CITES trade should be reported using the accepted CITES nomenclature, however in this case the 28 majority of trade was reported using the synonym Dendrophyllia fistula . Of 2373 individual shipment records for 2010-2013, 113 were reported using the accepted name E. fistula with the remainder (95%) reported under the name the D. fistula . While trade to the EU was low level, the majority of shipments imported were accepted using the name D. fistula. Up until 2012, Indonesia has published quotas using the name D. fistula , but in 2013 and 2014, quotas were issued using the accepted name Eguchipsammia fistula .

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2008-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade suspension being in place (Table 16, Figure 5). Relatively low levels of trade in source ‘I’ specimens were reported by importers during this period (151 specimens) and small amounts of wild sourced carvings, wild sourced corals for non-commercial purposes and live corals reported as sources other than W, F or C were traded during this period.

Table 16 : Main direct exports of Eguchipsammia fistula from Indonesia to the EU- 28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live W Exporter 7593 8389 8378 6564 649 1009 1832 440 Importer 6304 7319 6980 5490 63 111 84 56 163 33 raw corals W Exporter Importer 188 85 178 7 RoW live mariculture Exporter Importer 7 15 20 W Exporter 8795 9882 10515 12770 18210 17621 16999 17802 Importer 2175 4118 3810 5200 4135 2944 4739 4022 2727 436 raw corals mariculture Exporter Importer 5 5 W Exporter Importer 1931 348 180 40 5190 5599 5175 5004 3684 2832 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. EU trade restriction 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 5: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Eguchipsammia fistula from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Indirect exports of E. fistulata originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, primarily via Malaysia (Table 17). 29

Table 17: Indirect exports of live Eguchipsammia fistulata originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 23 39 9 Importer Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. Conservation status The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) stated that Eguchipsammia fistula [Dendrophyllia fistula ] is a reef-building coral that is mostly found on steep reef slopes, hanging walls or in small caves or overhangs in a shallow reef environment. As it is azooxanthellae, the corals do not need sunlight to survive, and so they are able to occupy a wide range of habitats (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef- building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species has not yet been assessed by the IUCN.

Eguchipsammia [Dendrophyllia ] species was found to easily be confused with Tubastraea species underwater, as these genera were believed to be indistinguishable when they are alive and without examination of the pattern of septa fusion (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; Veron, 2000).

Indonesia : Reported to be very common and widely distributed all over Indonesian waters at 1 – 20 m depth (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). However, the species is not mentioned in key references such as Veron (2000), Suharsono (2008a) and the IUCN Red List, nor is it mentioned in the numerous coral surveys that have taken place in various places in Indonesia. This may be because it is not present in the habitats being surveyed e.g. if it prefers deeper water, it is difficult to identify to species level, or because it is rare.

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) states that the number harvested and the export quota have decreased steadily. This species was reported to have been successfully transplanted [for mariculture] (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014).

30 SCLERACTINIA: Fungiidae Heliofungia actiniformis II/B

SYNONYMS : Fungia actiniformis, Fungia crassitentaculata, Fungia diversidens

COMMON NAMES: Mushroom Coral, Disk Coral

RANGE STATES: Australia, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mozambique, New Caledonia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Taiwan, Province of China, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension applied on 10/09/2012 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion formed on 14/09/2007 and confirmed on 02/12/2011. IUCN: VU

Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of Heliofungia actiniformis reported by Indonesia have been approximately 40,000-50,000 live wild pieces each year, and generally within quota (Table 18). The quota for H. actiniformis has decreased from 49,000 wild pieces in 2004 to 37,000 in 2014.

However, the quotas established for 2012 and 2013, were exceeded according to trade reported by Indonesia (Table 18). The total exports of 49,747 live wild pieces in 2013 were higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and appeared to exceed the quota for that year by more than 10,000 pieces. However, Indonesia’s annual report to CITES may be based on permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a zero quota for mariculture specimens in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, although low level trade in mariculture specimens has been reported in several years. Wabnitz et al. (2003) and Wood et al. (2012) reported limited success with the mariculture of Heliofungia .

Table 18: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Heliofungia actiniformis from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Quota (wild) 49000 48500 48500 48500 40500 44650 44650 42750 40000 39000 37000 Exporter 40046 45529 46543 48266 40374 44131 44112 40230 41396 49747 Importer 35958 40275 33126 32318 22732 17504 26393 15518 16668 13514

Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2008-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade being suspension in place (Table 19, Figure 6). Low levels of 31 trade in source ‘I’ were reported by importers during this period (154 specimens). Very low levels of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes were also reported. In addition, small quantities of corals reported as sources other than W, C and F were traded for commercial purposes. Table 19 : Main direct commercial exports of Heliofungia actiniformis from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

EU live W Exporter 10588 11385 10740 8486 1290 2058 2004 1278 1004 1177

Importer 9859 11070 8551 7324 128 10 79 20 62 48

raw corals W Exporter

Importer 232 147 20 163 10

RoW live mariculture Exporter

Importer 42 15 10 10 6 23 20 40

W Exporter 29458 34130 35801 39780 39084 42073 42108 38952 40392 48570

Importer 26099 29165 24575 24994 22604 17494 26297 15498 16606 13466 raw corals W Exporter

Importer 2194 298 387 352 5957 7368 6648 6008 4443 3086 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

EU28 RoW

Figure 6: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Heliofungia actiniformis from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers.

Indirect exports of H. actiniformis originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised relatively low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, primarily via Malaysia (Table 20).

32 Table 20: Indirect exports of live Heliofungia actiniformis originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 67 330 33 Importer 27 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. Conservation status This genus has one species, Heliofungia actiniformis , which is usually found on flat soft or rubble substrates, especially in reef lagoons or shallow turbid environments (Veron, 2000). The depth range is 1-25 m (Hoeksema 1990 in: Hoeksema et al ., 2008). The size of H. actiniformis was reported to vary, with adults growing up to 30 cm in diameter (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN in 2008 (Hoeksema et al. , 2008). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, of 36% over three generation lengths, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Hoeksema et al. , 2008).

H. actiniformis was described as common by Veron (2000) and as widespread and locally common throughout its range by Hoeksema et al. (2008).

This species is heavily harvested for aquarium trade and has suffered extensive reduction of coral reef habitat due to a combination of threats (Hoeksema et al. , 2008). This species was also thoughts to be particularly susceptible to bleaching and disease (Wilkinson 2004 in: Hoeksema et al. , 2008). However, in a study of the impact of the 2010 coral bleaching event in Wakatobi National Park, Wilson et al. (2012) classified the genus Heliofungia as relatively “resistant” to bleaching events. In one study, 1% of the specimens were recorded as bleached (Hoeksema, 1991 in: Hoeksema et al. , 2008). In a study on Indonesia reefs in Spermonde and Buton reefs in Sulawesi Yusuf and Jompa (2012) found that Heliofungia was among the genera most resistant to bleaching.

Indonesia : H. actiniformis was reported to be widely distributed in Indonesia (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, Suhardono, 2008a). Its distribution was considered to be clumped, with juveniles and adults found in one place (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014).

H. actiniformis has been found in Bali and adjacent regions, including Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara Province), Wakatobi (South Sulawesi), Derewan (East Kalimantan) and Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi) (Turak and deVantier, 2011). It was observed in Jakarta Bay in 1920 and 2005 and in the offshore Thousand Islands archipelago in 2005 (van der Meij et al ., 2010). A number of surveys have recorded the presence of H. actiniformis throughout Indonesia:

• During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at the Togean and Banggai Islands in Sulawesi in 1998, a total of 47 sites were visited and H. actiniformis was found at 20 (Allen and McKenna, 2001). • In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984, H. actiniformis was found at six: Lucipara Islands, north-east Komodo, Sumbawa, Taka Bone Rate, Salayer and South West Sulawesi (Best et al. , 1989). • Chou et al. (2010) noted that Heliofungia was recorded at Bintan Island in 2007 but not in 1993.

• During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and H. actiniformis was found at 17 33 (McKenna et al. , 2002); in 2002, a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and H. actiniformis was found at 20 (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • During a survey of four sites in Bali, H. actiniformis was found in all four (Hoeksema and Putra, 2000). • Putra et al . (2014) recorded Heliofungia at one of six study sites in in the Krakatau Islands. • Hoeksema (2012) reported that H. actiniformis was found on all 13 reefs surveyed in Spermonde Archipelago (Makassar Strait, Indonesia) in 1984–1986; a total 342 individual corals were found in all transect sample units together (28,250 m 2). • Recorded at two of nine sites surveyed at the end of the Luwuk Pensinsula, Sulawesi in 2007 (Scaps and Runtukahu, 2008). • During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, E. cristata was found in 10 of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007). • Reported in Bunaken National Park in North Sulawesi, where it was considered to have a widespread local distribution, occurring in 33% or more of the 39 sites surveyed in 2003 (Turak and DeVantier, 2003). The authors suggested that they are likely to form locally- reproductive populations (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

The genus Heliofungia was recorded in the following collection sites: Banyuwangi, Bali Strait; Belitung Island, south Sumatra; Binuangeun, west Java; Cilamaya, west Java; Gilmanuk West Bali; Jepara Central Java; Kupang, West Timor; Labuhan, west Java; Lampung, south Sumatra; Madura Island, east Java; Pulau Untung Jawa Island, Central Java; Sibolga, north Sumatra; and Ujung Pandang, South Sulawesi (Lilley, 2001).

Only the green or brightly coloured specimens were reported to be collected for trade, and usually those between 10 -15 cm in diameter, whereas the larger and duller specimens were not collected (Kittweiss and Wolff, 2010; Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). In the Spermonde Archipelago, Knittweiss and Wolff (2010) found that almost all polyps larger than 11 cm were dull brown colour morphs of no commercial value. Knittweiss and Wolff (2010) recommended that a study on whether the gene pool of H. actiniformis was influenced by the selective harvesting of colourful polyps was needed. In terms of polyp price, Knittweiss and Wolff (2010) found that larger (8-11 cm) polyps with purple tentacles attained the highest price.

Suharsono (2008a) described the species as common, and scattered throughout Indonesian waters. Using a methodology based on size of colony and frequency of occurrence, Suharsono and Giyanto (2006) described Heliofungia as uncommon in Bakauheni, suggesting harvest should be limited; rare in Kepulauan Seribu and Jepara, suggesting that harvest should be strictly limited; and very rare in Teluk Cendrawasih, suggesting that harvest should be prohibited.

Hoeksema (2012) noted that during a field survey in 1984–1986 in the Spermonde Archipelago, there were no signs of H. actiniformis fishing. However, Knittweis & Wolff (2010) suggested that the highest quotas in Sulawesi were regularly allocated to H. actiniformis , with harvest quotas being stable at 6,000 pieces (i.e. individual polyps) from 1999 to 2002, rising to 7,000 pieces in 2003 and stabilising at 9,500 pieces between 2004 and 2006 in the Spermonde Archipelago. The authors found that harvesting practices had a high impact on the overall population structure, as illustrated by a decline in young polyps at harvested sites compared to unharvested areas (Knittweiss and Wolff, 2010). The authors noted that fishermen collect every coral that they feel middlemen might buy, with middlemen then selecting a proportion of the corals, meaning that a much higher number of H. actiniformis was harvested than permitted by the quotas (Knittweiss and Wolff, 2010). Knittweiss and Wolff (2010) concluded that harvest quotas for H. actiniformis should be reduced significantly and that a size limit of 5 cm limit should be introduced. Since H. actiniformis only reaches reproductive maturity at a size of 8 cm (Abe, 1937), reductions in

fishing effort as well as a strict enforcement of existing marine protected areas would in addition 34 be imperative to protect this species’ spawning stock (Knittweiss and Wolff, 2010).

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) noted that reports stating that Heliofungia in Supermonde and Makassar are smaller and depleted in number cannot be confirmed. It suggested that coral was often depleted when next to big cities in Indonesia, as is the case in Spermonde (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014).

SCLERACTINIA: Merulinidae 35 Hydnophora microconos II/B

SYNONYMS : Monticularia microconos

RANGE STATES: American Samoa, Australia, Bangladesh, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), China, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Cook Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Fiji, French Polynesia, Guam, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mozambique, Myanmar, New Caledonia, Oman, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Réunion, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, Tonga, Tuvalu, United Republic of Tanzania, United States Minor Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension applied on 10/05/2006 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion formed on 11/07/2000, replaced by a positive opinion on 15/50/2002 and with a negative opinion formed on 22/05/2003.

IUCN: NT

Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of Hydnophora microconos reported by Indonesia have been 4000-8000 live wild pieces each year and generally within quota (Table 21).

The quota for H. microconos has increased from 4750 wild pieces in 2004 to 6500 pieces in 2014. The quotas established for 2012 and 2013, appeared to be exceeded according to trade reported by Indonesia (Table 21). The total exports of 8330 live wild pieces in 2013 were higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and appeared to exceed the quota of 6500 pieces for that year by nearly 2000 pieces. However, Indonesia’s annual report to CITES may be based on permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Table 21: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced and maricultured Hydnophora 36 microconos from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 WILD Quota 4750 4750 4750 4750 5850 6305 6305 6305 6500 6500 6500 Live Exporter 4503 4518 4539 4714 5829 6210 6254 5841 6812 8330

Importer 2706 3191 2776 2424 2222 1857 1288 2007 2157 1249

MARICULTURE Quota 2000 579 1029 Live Exporter 270 395 240

Importer 125 5 6 Raw Exporter corals

Importer 5 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2004-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade suspension being in place (Table 22, Figure 7).

Indonesia established a quota for mariculture specimens in 2004, 2005 and 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, although very low level trade in mariculture specimens has been reported in 2011 and 2013.

Very low levels of source ‘I’ trade were reported by importers during this period. In addition, very small amounts of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes were reported 2004-2013.

Table 22 : Main direct commercial exports of Hydnophora microconos from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live mariculture Exporter 30 145 98 Importer 125 W Exporter 292 144 155 247 353 398 449 244 307 283 Importer 65 87 12 30 37 50 9 3 22 RoW live mariculture Exporter 240 250 142 Importer 5 6 W Exporter 4211 4374 4384 4467 5476 5812 5805 5597 6505 8047 Importer 2641 3104 2764 2394 2185 1807 1279 2004 2157 1227 raw corals mariculture Exporter Importer 5 W Exporter Importer 591 87 32 1226 1538 1298 1183 994 705 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 4000 37 3000

2000

1000

0

EU28 RoW

Figure 7: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Hydnophora microconos from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Indirect exports of H. microconos originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, via Singapore (Table 23).

Table 23: Indirect exports of live Heliofungia actiniformis originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 5 5 Importer Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. Conservation status Hydnophora microconos was reported to be found in all reef environments, though primarily in lagoons and protected slopes in the Pacific (Veron, 2000). Sheppard et al. (2014) considered the species to be widespread throughout its range. The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Near Threatened by the IUCN in 20014 (Sheppard et al. , 2014). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, with 20% of reefs already destroyed, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Sheppard et al. , 2014).

It was described by Veron (2000) as an uncommon species, however, more recently Sheppard et al. (2014) considered it to be common throughout its range.

The most important known threat was reported to be extensive reduction of coral reef habitat due to a combination of threats, however, this species was also reported to be moderately susceptible to bleaching and harvesting for aquarium trade (Sheppard et al. , 2014).

Indonesia : The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) reported that “Colonies are found on almost all reefs from reef flats down to 15 meters depth, widely spread and common in Indonesia and Brunei (Turak and DeVantier 2011)”. The distribution map provided in Suharsono (2008a) indicated that H. microconos is relatively widely distributed in Indonesia, and occurs in Sumatra, Java, Papua New Guinea, Bali, West Timor, Sulawesi and the Maluku Islands. H. microconos has also been found in regions adjacent to Bali, including Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara Province),

Wakatobi (South Sulawesi), Derewan (East Kalimantan) and Bunaken National Park (North 38 Sulawesi) (Turak and deVantier, 2011). It was recorded at Giliketapang Island, East Java (Puspitasari et al. , 2013) and in Long island, Jepara, Java (Indarjo et al., 2004).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of H. microconos in Indonesia:

• In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984, H. microconos was found at seven: Tukang Besi, Sumba, north-east Komodo, Sumbawa, Taka Bone Rate, Salayer, south-west Sulawesi (Best et al ., 1989). • During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and H. microconos was found at 30 (McKenna et al ., 2002); in 2002, a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and H. microconos was found at 29 (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • H. microconos was found in the waters of Padang, West Sumatra, based on the collection of Bung Hatta University (Jonker and Johan, 1999). • During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at the Togean and Banggai Islands in Sulawesi in 1998 (Allen and McKenna, 2001), a total of 47 sites were visited and H. microconos was found at 11. • During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, H. microconos was found in 18 of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007). • The species was found in four of five stations at Marabatuan Island and Matasirih Island, South Kalimantan (Munasik and Siringoringo, 2011). • H. microconos was observed in Jakarta Bay in 1920 and 2005 and in the offshore Thousand Islands archipelago in 2005 (van der Meij et al ., 2010) . • During a study in 2007 in five locations at Nusalaut Island, Central Maluku District, H. microconos was found at two (Souhoka, 2009). The species was not encountered by Giyanto (2012) during surveys in 2012 in the waters of Ternate, Tidore and the surrounding areas. • It was considered to have a widespread local distribution in Bunaken National Park in North Sulawesi, occurring in 46% of the 39 sites surveyed in 2003 (Turak and DeVantier, 2003). The authors considered these to be locally-reproductive populations (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

In 1992, it was considered to be a dominant species on the lower slopes of the reefs at Sanur and Nusa Dua, Bali at depths of 5-7 m (van Woesik, 1997 in: Hopley & Suharsono, 2000). Raymakers (2001) later categorised H. microconos as threatened to a lesser extent (of those reviewed by that author) with a low estimated abundance – 20-50 colonies/100 m 2 - and a high export quota. However, the Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) suggested that the quota for this species is quite small relative to its abundance in the wild. The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) reported that only the smaller specimens (<15 cm in diameter) that are brightly coloured (yellow, bright orange or green) were collected.

Six species in the genus Hydnophora are reported to occur in Indonesia (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; Species+, 2015). However, much of the information in the scientific literature refers to the genus and does not provide information on which species is being referred to (e.g. Bruckner and Borneman 2006; Chou et al 2010; Guest et al ; Gunawan et al ., 2006; Hoeksema & Putra, 2000; Jompa et al .; Lilley, 2001; Putra et al ., 2014; Raymakers, 2001; Scaps & Runtukahu, 2008; and Wilson et al ., 2012).

SCLERACTINIA: Mussidae 39 Blastomussa wellsi II/B

RANGE STATES: Australia, Egypt, Fiji, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension for Blastomussa spp. from Indonesia applied on 18/02/2005 and most recently confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion for the species Blastomussa wellsi from Indonesia formed on 30/01/2003.

Current positive opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Australia formed on 14/09/2007 and confirmed on 20/06/2011. Positive opinion for Blastomussa spp. from Australia formed on 07/11/2014.

Current no opinion i) for Blastomussa spp. from Fiji formed on 03/09/2014. Previous negative opinion for Blastomussa wellsi formed on 22/05/2003, formalised as an Article 4.6(b) suspension on 03/09/2008 and replaced by a no opinion on 15/09/2008.

Previous negative opinion wild-sourced specimens from Tonga formed on 22/04/2005 and removed on 12/06/2006.

IUCN: NT

Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of Blastomussa wellsi reported by Indonesia have typically been between 3000-4000 live wild pieces each year and generally within quota (Table 24).

The quota for wild-sourced B. wellsi has decreased slightly from 3800 wild pieces in 2004 to 3500 in 2014. However, the quotas established for 2012 and 2013, appear to have been exceeded according to trade reported by Indonesia (Table 24). The total reported export of 4354 live wild pieces in 2013 was higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and appear to exceed the quota of for that year by approximately 850 pieces. However, Indonesia’s annual report to CITES may be based on permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a quota of 2400 pieces of B. wellsi from mariculture in 2005 and a zero quota for mariculture specimens in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, although low level trade in mariculture specimens has been reported in several years (Table 25).

Table 24: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Blastomussa wellsi from 40 Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Quota 3800 3800 3750 3750 3150 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 Exporter 3555 3584 3622 3733 3145 3424 3490 3300 3650 4354 Importer 2489 3260 3366 3367 2987 2846 2747 2625 2776 3017 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Very low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2008-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries (Table 25, Figure 8) despite the trade being suspension in place. Low levels of source ‘I’ trade were reported by importers during this period (138 specimens). In addition, small quantities of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes, wild sourced trade reported by weight and trade in corals of unknown source were also reported 2004-2013.

Blastomussa was the ninth most confiscated coral genus in the UK during the period 2000-2007 (Jones, 2008).

Table 25 : Main direct commercial exports of Blastomussa wellsi from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live W Exporter 58 59 18 12 17 48 29 9 40 23 Importer 13 2 4 2 2 RoW live mariculture Exporter Importer 5 4 6 27 W Exporter 3497 3520 3604 3721 3128 3376 3461 3291 3610 4331 Importer 2476 3256 3364 3367 2983 2846 2747 2625 2774 3015 raw corals W Exporter Importer 198 14 9 43 216 192 194 225 181 77 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Indirect exports of B. wellsi originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, the majority via Israel (Table 26).

Table 26: Indirect exports of live Blastomussa wellsi originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 3 Importer 50 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 4000 41 3000

2000

1000

0

EU28 RoW Figure 8: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Blastomussa wellsi from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Conservation status Blastomussa wellsi was considered to be widespread and is found at depths up to 40 m, and lives on reef slopes protected from wave action and turbid environments (Turak et al ., 2008c). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Near Threatened by the IUCN in 2008 (Turak et al ., 2008c). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, with an estimated 18% reefs already destroyed, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Turak et al ., 2008c).

The species was described as uncommon by Turak et al. (2008c) and Veron (2000).

Turak et al . (2008c) considered the most important known threat for corals to be extensive reduction of coral reef habitat due to a combination of threats, but also referred to the harvest of the aquarium trade within the threats to this species.

Blastomussa are slow growing, with little known about their life histories and characteristics and were therefore considered difficult to propagate (Wabnitz et al. , 2003).

Indonesia : The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) stated that B. wellsi was found throughout Indonesian waters while Suharsono (2008a) stated that it is scattered throughout the waters of Indonesia, usually in deep waters. Its preferred habitat are mid-shore reefs in low light in a protected environment at a depth of more than 20 meters with a sandy, dead coral or muddy bottom (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The species was recorded at the Spermonde Reefs at depths of 15 metres (Lilley, 2001; Raymakers 2001).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of B. wellsi in Indonesia:

• During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and B. wellsi was found at one (McKenna et al ., 2002); in 2002, a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and B. wellsi was not found at any (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • The species was not found in Bali and adjacent regions during two surveys (Hoeksema and Putra, 2000; Turak and deVantier, 2011).

• During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, B. wellsi was found 42 in two of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007).

Lilley (2001) noted that, while the species is considered to be uncommon, in places where they are found, they can be abundant. Blastomussa was considered to be a rare genus in the vicinity of Kapoposang Island (Spermonde) during a study in 1996 (Yusuf and Rani, 2006, in: Yusuf and Jompa, 2012).

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) stated that B. wellsi was relatively uncommon and Suharsono (2008a) suggested that it is rarely found in Indonesia. Bruckner and Borneman (2006) undertook a survey of 12 locations in the Spermonde Archipelago in Southwest Sulawesi, an area with approximately 150 islands which they reported was the largest coral collection area in Indonesia. The authors reported that “ B. wellsi was found at the base of one outer reef (20-25 m depth) in one transect at a density of 1.2 colonies/m 2, and in other transects at densities of < 0.2 colonies/m 2 population” (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The survey gave an overal density of B. wellsi in an area of 160 km 2 in the Spermonde Archipelago of 0-0.05/m 2, with a population estimate of 8,000 (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). Raymakers (2001) noted that the species occurs in Spermonde at low densities of 5 colonies/100 m 2.

The authors estimated that at Spermonde Archipelago, 100% of colonies were within the legal size range as established by Indonesia, with the annual harvest quota representing 30% of the population (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). While two species of Blastomussa occur in Indonesia, Bruckner and Borneman (2006) noted that government authorities have only established a quota for one species at a time. They explained that “in 1999, a quota of 9,000 was established for B. wellsi , which was reduced to 8,000 in 2000 and set at 0 in 2001. In 2001 B. wellsi was replaced with B. merleti at a quota of 2500”. Lilley (2001) noted that B. wellsi had already been collected from Lampung Bay for at least ten years prior to the study. At this location, it lives in turbid waters at a depth of 27 m, near the Maitem Islands. Lilley (2001) observed one collector who brought 15 colonies of B. wellsi to the surface, during 30 minutes of searching. Market size was reported to be 4-6 cm by Raymakers (2001).

SCLERACTINIA: Mussidae 43 Scolymia vitiensis II/B

SYNONYMS : Lithophyllia vitiensis, Parascolymia vitiensis

COMMON NAMES: Doughnut Coral

RANGE STATES: Australia, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Cook Islands, Djibouti, Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Pitcairn Islands (United Kingdom) (uncertain), Réunion, Saudi Arabia, Solomon Islands, South Africa (uncertain), Taiwan, Province of China, Tonga, Vanuatu, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension applied on 10/05/2006 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion formed on 22/05/2003.

Current Article 4.6(b) suspension for wild-sourced Scolymia spp. from Tonga applied on 28/05/2015. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension for wild- sourced Scolymia vitiensis applied on 03/09/2008 and most recently confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion for wild-sourced Scolymia vitiensis formed on 24/04/2005.

Current no opinion i) for wild-sourced Scolymia spp. from Fiji formed on 07/11/2014. Previous negative opinion for wild-sourced Scolymia vitiensis formed on 22/05/2003 and removed on 15/01/2004.

IUCN: NT

Trade patterns The species was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. Exports of S. vitiensis reported by Indonesia have been approximately 4000-5000 live wild specimens annually between 2004 and 2013 (Table 27).

The quota during this period has been 4500 live wild pieces each year, 2004-2014 with an additional zero quota for specimens from mariculture in 2007. However, the 2012 and 2013 quotas for wild specimens were exceeded according to trade reported by Indonesia. Indonesia reported total exports of 5762 live wild pieces in 2013, which was higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and exceeded the quota of 4500 pieces for that year by over 1000 pieces. However, Indonesia’s annual report to CITES may be based on permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Table 27: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Scolymia vitiensis from Indonesia 44 and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Quota (wild) 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 Exporter 3997 4098 4380 4455 4049 4438 4453 4234 4693 5762 Importer 2557 3238 2511 2668 2863 2598 2039 2483 2929 2933 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Very low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2008-2013 by Indonesia and to a lesser extent EU countries, despite the trade being suspension in place (Table 28, Figure 9). Very low levels of source ‘I’ trade were reported during this period (35 specimens). In addition, very small quantities of wild sourced live corals for breeding purposes and wild sourced raw corals for commercial purposes were also reported during this period.

Table 28 : Main direct commercial exports of Scolymia vitiensis from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’). All trade for commercial purposes.

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live W Exporter 84 18 37 23 36 41 28 43 24 65 Importer 14 6 4

RoW live mariculture Exporter 105

Importer

W Exporter 3913 4080 4343 4432 4013 4397 4425 4191 4669 5697

Importer 2543 3228 2505 2668 2859 2598 2039 2483 2929 2933

raw corals mariculture Exporter

Importer 4 1

W Exporter

Importer 264 23 4 68 248 953 437 356 345 228

Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

Indirect exports of S. vitiensis originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes in 2007 via Singapore (Table 29).

Table 29: Indirect exports of live Scolymia vitiensis originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 10 Importer 4 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 13/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 4000 45 3000

2000

1000

0

EU28 RoW

Figure 9: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Scolymia vitiensis from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Conservation status Scolymia vitiensis was considered to be a widespread species, found in deep waters up to 50 m (Turak et al. , 2008a). Scolymia vitiensis were reported to be partly reef-building corals but are mostly found at the bottom of reef slopes (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). Veron (2000) noted that there is a wide latitudinal variation in this species, with subtropical forms usually solitary, flat and less than 60 mm in diameter, whereas tropical forms are larger and sometimes colonial. The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Near Threatened by the IUCN (Turak et al ., 2008a). Specific population trends are unknown, and therefore the decline in coral reef habitat, with about 21% reefs already destroyed, has been used as a proxy for population decline of this species (Turak et al ., 2008a).

It was described as rare throughout its range (Turak et al. , 2008a), usually uncommon, and rare in the south-west Indian Ocean (Veron, 2000; Turak et al. , 2008a).

The main known threat for this species was reported to be extensive reduction of coral reef habitat due to a combination of threats, however, this species was also noted to be harvested for the aquarium trade (Turak et al. , 2008a). Scolymia vitiensis was thought to be more resilient to some of the threats faced by corals (Wilkinson 2004 in Turak et al. , 2008a). In a study of the impact of the 2010 coral bleaching event in Wakatobi National Park, Wilson et al. (2012) classified the genus Scolymia as of “intermediate” susceptibility to bleaching events.

Scolymia is a slow growing genus that is difficult to propagate, so there has been limited success in mariculture (Wood et al. , 2012).

Indonesia: The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) reported that the species occurred throughout Indonesia in sheltered areas and in the deeper water at the bottom of reef slopes. Similarly, Suharsono (2008a) reported that the species was found scattered throughout Indonesia, usually found in sheltered spots. The distribution map provided in Suharsono (2008a) indicated that S. vitiensis is relatively widely distributed in Indonesia.

Lilley (2001) reported the occurrence of the species at Komodo and Rinca, Karimunjawa, Subawa, Selayar and Spermonde (Lilley, 2001). S. vitiensis has been found in Bali and adjacent regions,

including Wakatobi (South Sulawesi) and Derewan (East Kalimantan) (Turak and deVantier, 46 2011).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of S. vitiensis in Indonesia:

• During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at the Togean and Banggai Islands in Sulawesi in 1998 (Allen and McKenna, 2001), Scolymia vitiensis was found at 16 out of 47 sites surveyed. Describing S. vitiensis as “wide-ranging”, the authors noted that it was found in low numbers at 16 sites in the Togeans, but was absent in the Banggai Group (Allen and McKenna, 2001). • In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984 (Best et al ., 1989), S. vitiensis was found at four: Northeast Komodo, Sumbawa, Salayer and SouthWest Sulawesi. • During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and S. vitiensis was found at one (McKenna et al ., 2002); in 2002, a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and S. vitiensis was found at three (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, S. vitiensis was found in 3 of 21 sites (Scaps et al ., 2007).

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) described the species as relatively common. No further information on the status of the species in Indonesia was identified.

SCLERACTINIA: PECTINIIDAE 47 Mycedium elephantotus II/B

SYNONYMS : Madrepora elephantotus, Mycedium tenuicostatum, Mycedium tubifex, Phyllastraea tubifex RANGE STATES: American Samoa, Australia, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Cook Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Fiji, French Polynesia, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, Mozambique, Myanmar, New Caledonia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Réunion, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Taiwan, Province of China, Thailand, Tonga, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Viet Nam UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: No current or historical opinions or suspensions.

IUCN: Least Concern

Trade patterns Indonesia published a CITES export quota of 2500 live, wild-taken Mycedium elephantotus for 2014 retrospectively in 2015, as it had been missed from the quota list in 2014. Indonesia had not published export quotas for this species previously. Annual reports for 2014 are not required to be submitted until 31 October 2015, so quota compliance cannot be assessed. Direct exports of M. elephantotus from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world 2004-2013, comprised very low levels of trade consisting of live corals exported for commercial purposes, of mainly captive- born origin (Table 30). No trade in M. elephantotus from Indonesia was reported before 2011. No indirect exports of M. elephantotus to the EU-28 originating in Indonesia were reported 2004- 2013.

Table 30: Main direct exports of Mycedium elephantotus from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. All reported trade was in live corals and for commercial purposes.

Importer Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU F Importer 110 30 Exporter 5 W Importer 5 Exporter RoW F Importer Exporter 90 W Importer 20 20 Exporter Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015

Conservation status 48 M. elephantotus is a zooxanthellate coral with laminar or encrusting colonies (Veron, 2000). Veron (2000) noted that it could be found in most reef environments that were protected from strong wave action. It was reported to be tolerant of shaded conditions (Dinesen, 1983) and sedimentation, occurring in shallow water in turbid conditions (Dikou and van Woesik, 2006). The species was regarded as a habitat/ecological generalist in Australian waters (Roelofs and Silcock, 2008). M. elephantotus was reported to be found to at least 40 m depth (Sheppard et al. , 2014) and to be commonly found from 12-15 m, rarely at 3-11 m, in the South China Sea and Gulf of Siam (Titlyanov and Titlyanova, 2002).

M. elephantotus was reported to be a hermaphroditic broadcast spawner with an annual reproductive cycle (Dai et al. , 2000). Age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

M. elephantotus was reported to be widespread in the Indo-Pacific (Veron, 2000; Roelofs and Silcock, 2008). Sheppard et al. (2014) reported its range to extend from the Red Sea to the central Pacific. Veron (2000) and Sheppard et al. (2014) reported M. elephantotus to be common. The species was categorised by the IUCN as Least Concern and, although species specific information on population was not available and the population trend was unknown, a population reduction of 20% over three generations was inferred from estimated habitat loss within its range (Sheppard et al. , 2014). Re-assessment in 10 years was considered important due to predicted threats from climate change and ocean acidification (Sheppard et al. , 2014).

The species was reported to be targeted for the aquarium trade (Sheppard et al. , 2014). However, the main threat to corals was reported to be global climate change, in particular, temperature extremes leading to bleaching and increased susceptibility to disease, increased severity of El Niño Southern Oscillation events, storms and ocean acidification (Sheppard et al. , 2014). Reported anthropogenic threats to corals include fisheries (including chemical and dynamite fishing), human development, invasive species, pollution and sedimentation, although the severity of these combined threats for individual species were not known (Sheppard et al. , 2014). White Plague-like disease was also reported in M. elephantotus (Sutherland et al., 2004). The species was reported to have moderate susceptibility to bleaching (Roelofs and Silcock, 2008).

Indonesia: Suharsono (2008a) reported M. elephantotus to be spread throughout Indonesian waters and mapped records from 14 provinces: Aceh, West Sumatra, Bengkulu, Riau, Bangka- Belitung, Banten, Central Java, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, South Sulawesi, Southeast Sulawesi, Central Sulawesi, Maluku and Papua. In addition it was reported from Bali and East Kalimantan (Turak and DeVantier, 2011) and North Sulawesi (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of M. elephantotus in these provinces.

• In nine areas surveyed by the Snellius-II expedition in 1984 and the Buginesia project (1980), M. elephantotus was recorded from seven sites: Tukang Besi Islands (Southeast Sulawesi), Sumba and Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara), Subawa (West Nusa Tenggara), Taka Bone Rate, Salayer and Spermonde (South Sulawesi) (Best et al. , 1989). • In other sites surveyed across Sulawesi, it was reported from 23 of 27 sites surveyed at Wakatobi National Park (Southeast Sulawesi) (Hoeksema, 2003) and from 15 of 47 sites surveyed around the Banggai and Togean Islands (Central Sulawesi) (Allen and McKenna, 2001). • Siringoringo and Hadi (2013) also recorded it from six of nine sites surveyed around the Banggai Islands.

The following surveys recorded the presence of M. elephantotus in provinces were harvest is not permitted: 49 • Chou et al. (2010) reported M. elephantotus from Bintan Island (Riau) in 1993 and again in 2007. • A longitudinal study in Jakarta Bay reported the species from around 1920 and again in 2005 (van der Meij et al. , 2010). • Reported from Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi) in areas of moderate coral cover (Devantier et al. , 2006) and also by (Yap et al. , 2013). • Turak and DeVantier (2003) recorded M. elephantotus from 28 of the 39 sites surveyed in Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi). • Scaps et al. (2007) recorded the species at each of 21 sites surveyed in the Pulisan region (North Sulawesi). • Turak and DeVantier (2011) reported it from five exposed locations out of 47 sampling stations in on the south and west coasts of Bali and the adjacent island of Nusa Penida (Bali Province). • Souhoka (2009) reported M. elephantotus from each of five sites investigated around Nusalaut Island (Maluku). • M. elephantotus was reported from 24 of 45 sites surveyed at Raja Ampat Islands (Papua Province) (McKenna et al. , 2002). Donnelly et al. (2003) reported it from 41 of 51 sites surveyed in another survey of the Raja Ampat Islands.

In a study to standardise quantification coral abundance, the genus Mycedium was categorised as rare from Bakauheni (Lampung), uncommon at Kepalauan Seribu (Jakarta) and Jepara (Central Java), common at Teluk Cendrawasih (West Papua) but was not recorded at Merak (Banten) (Suharsono and Giyanto, 2006).

50 SCLERACTINIA: TRACHYPHYLLIIDAE Trachyphyllia geoffroyi II/B

SYNONYMS: Antillia duncani, Antillia flabelliformis, Antillia geoffroyi, Antillia infundibuliformis, Antillia lonsdaleia, Antillia orientalis, Antillia sinuata, Antillophyllia lonsdaleia, Callogyra formosa, Manicina amarantum, Trachyphyllia amarantum, Trachyphyllia lelandi, Trachyphyllia radiata, Turbinolia geoffroyi, Wellsophyllia geoffroyi, Wellsophyllia radiata

COMMON NAMES: Crater Coral, Folded Coral, Puffed Coral

RANGE STATES: Australia, British Indian Ocean Territory (United Kingdom), Egypt, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mozambique, Myanmar, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Thailand, Tonga, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Indonesia (except maricultured specimens) formed on 08/12/2014. Previous Article 4.6(b) suspension (except maricultured specimens) applied on 18/02/2005 and last confirmed on 04/09/2014. Previous negative opinion formed on 16/09/1999, replaced by a positive opinion on 15/05/2002 and again with a negative opinion on 22/05/2003.

Current Article 4.6(b) suspension for wild-sourced specimens from Fiji applied on 03/09/2008 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinion formed on 22/05/2003 and confirmed on 25/10/2005.

Current positive opinion for wild-sourced specimen from Australia formed on 20/06/2011.

Previous negative opinion for wild-sourced specimens from Tonga formed on 22/04/2005 and removed on 12/06/2006.

IUCN: Near Threatened

Taxonomic note CITES recognises Trachyphyllia geoffroyi as an accepted species (UNEP-WCMC, 2012), based on Veron (2000). T. geoffroyi includes the synonym Wellsophyllia radiata (UNEP-WCMC, 2012). Best and Hoeksema (1987) placed W. radiata in the genus Trachyphyllia , noting its occurrence in Indonesia, Singapore and north-west Australia. It was made a synonym of T. geoffroyi by Veron and Hodgson (1989) who noted that it was primarily characterized by having adjoined, rather than phaceloid, corallites, which appears to be an ecomorph correlated with soft substrates. Similarly, Hoeksema (2014) considered W. radiata to be a synonym of T. geoffroyi.

However, the Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) and Suharsono (2008) recognise W. radiata and T. geoffroyi as two separate species on the basis of clear differences in the shape of the walls of colonies, noting that both taxa occupy the same habitat but they are both highly distinctive.

In this species account, information is provided on T. geoffroyi including the taxon W. radiata .

Trade patterns 51 Trachyphyllia geoffroyi was listed in CITES Appendix II on 18/01/1990 through the listing of the order Scleractinia. As Indonesia considers Wellsophyllia radiata to be an accepted species, it has reported trade in both T. geoffroyi and W. radiata and has published separate quotas for both taxa for all years, with the quota for 2014 in prep and the 2015 quotas not yet published.

Exports of T. geoffroyi (including the taxon W. radiata ) reported by Indonesia have typically been between 50,000 and 60,000 live wild pieces each year and generally within quota (Table 31). The quota for T. geoffroyi has decreased from 52,000 wild pieces in 2004 to 42,000 in 2014, whereas the quota for W. radiata has remained stable at 10,000 pieces. However, the total reported exports of 65,069 live wild pieces in 2013 were higher than exports in any of the previous nine years, and appear to have exceeded the combined quota ( T. geoffroyi and W. radiata ) of 52,000 pieces for that year by approximately 13,000 pieces (Table 31).

Table 31: CITES export quotas for wild-sourced Trachyphyllia geoffroyi and Wellsophyllia radiata from Indonesia and global direct exports, as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2004-2013. Importer reported trade data for 2013 may be incomplete; trade data for 2014 are not yet available.

Quota 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Trachyphyllia geoffroyi (wild) 52000 51000 51000 51000 45000 48500 50000 47500 43500 42000 42,000 Wellsophyllia radiata (wild) 10000 10000 10000 10000 9000 9000 9000 9000 10000 10000 In prep. 1 Exporter 50838 56459 57864 60798 53928 56903 58529 53049 45299 65069 1 Importer 45838 53407 48160 48346 40222 38525 46134 36602 37831 35188 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015. 1 includes trade reported as Trachyphyllia geoffroyi and as Wellsophyllia radiata

Breaking this down further, it is apparent that the 2013 quota established by Indonesia for T. geoffroyi was 42,000 pieces and Indonesia reported exports of 53,130. The 2013 quota established for W. radiata was 10,000 pieces with trade reported by Indonesia amounting to 11,939 pieces. However, Indonesia’s annual report to CITES may be based on permits issued rather than actual trade, and therefore actual trade levels may be less than the volumes reported.

Indonesia established a quota of 1,000 pieces of T. geoffroyi from mariculture in 2005 and a zero quota for mariculture specimens of T. geoffroyi and W. radiata in 2007. It has not established a quota for mariculture since then, although low level trade in mariculture specimens has been reported (Table 32).

Low level imports of wild specimens into the EU have been reported 2004-2013 by both Indonesia and EU countries, despite the trade suspension in place (Table 32). Low levels of trade in source ‘I’ were reported by importers during this period (465 specimens). Very low levels of wild sourced trade for non-commercial purposes and commercial trade in sources O and U were also reported during this period. Additionally, very low levels of wild sourced commercial trade in carvings and live corals reported by weight were reported.

Table 32 : Main direct commercial exports of Trachyphyllia geoffroyi from 52 Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013. (Source ‘mariculture’ includes trade recorded as source ‘F’ and ‘C’).

Importer Term Source Reported by 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EU live W Exporter 386 223 521 462 477 773 938 364 236 450 Importer 156 40 51 36 48 60 18 15 30 19 RoW live mariculture Exporter Importer 100 15 10 17 40 61 28 78 W Exporter 50452 56236 57342 60336 53451 56130 57591 52685 45063 64619 Importer 45682 53302 48109 48310 40174 38465 46116 36587 37801 35169 raw corals mariculture Exporter Importer 2 20 7 W Exporter Importer 3805 176 126 458 6189 6947 5923 5895 4677 3084 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

EU trade restriction 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0

EU28 RoW Figure 9: Direct imports of wild-sourced (includes source U and unspecified) raw and live Trachyphyllia geoffroyi from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2004-2013 for commercial purposes (purpose T and unspecified), as reported by the importers .

Indirect exports of T. geoffroyi originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 comprised very low levels of live wild corals re-exported for commercial purposes, primarily via Singapore (Table 33).

Table 33: Indirect exports of live Trachyphyllia geoffroyi originating in Indonesia to the EU-28, 2004-2013. All trade was wild sourced for commercial purposes. 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Exporter 15 33 50 5 4 Importer 15 15 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 24/03/2015.

CITES trade should be reported using the accepted CITES nomenclature, however, of 13,771 individual shipment records for 2010-2013, 11,740 were reported using the name T. geoffroyi with the remainder, 2,030 (15%), reported under the name the W. radiata . While trade to the EU was low level, about half of shipments imported were accepted using the name W. radiata.

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) noted that the misidentification of, and use of synonyms for, corals such as Wellsophyllia and Trachyphyllia could lead to inconsistencies in 53 trade data. Lilley (2001) stated that T. geoffroyi and W. radiata are considered to represent two separate species by the traders. Similarly Raymakers (2001) noted that during interviews, collectors and traders stated that the two species can be identified without a doubt.

Jones (2008) reported that Trachyphyllia was the top confiscated coral genus in the UK during the period 2000-2007. Conservation status Trachyphyllia geoffroyi is the only species in the genus Trachyphyllia (Veron, 2000) . It occurs in inter-reef environments and on soft substrates around continental islands (Veron, 2000). It is rare on reefs, common around continental islands and some inter-reef areas (Veron, 2000). The species is typically found as solitary unattached colonies but occasionally forms massive colonies (Sheppard et al . 2008). The age at maturity was assumed to be three to eight years, based on most reef-building corals having been reported to reach sexual maturity at that age (Wallace, 1999).

The species was categorised as Near Threatened by the IUCN in 2008 (Sheppard et al . 2008). Specific population trends are unknown and the estimated habitat loss of 22% from reefs already destroyed within its range was considered to be the best inference of population reduction (Sheppard et al . 2008). Sheppard et al. (2008) suggested that “it is very widespread, and although uncommon within its range, it can be found in deeper waters and off-reef areas, and therefore is likely to be more resilient to habitat loss and reef degradation because of an assumed large effective population size that is highly connected and/or stable with enhanced genetic variability”.

Habitat loss is the main threat to the species, however, it is also highly susceptible to harvesting for the aquarium trade (Sheppard et al. 2008).

It was considered to be a slow growing species and difficult to propagate and limited success in mariculture has been reported (Wabnitz et al. , 2003; Wood et al. , 2012).

Indonesia : T. geoffroyi was reported to have a wide distribution and is found throughout Indonesian waters (Suharsono, 2008a; Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014). The species was reported to be found from shallow waters to 30 meters depth (Scientific Authority of Indonesia, 2014; Suharsono, 2008a).

The species has been recorded from Lampung Bay, Komodo and Rinca Islands, Pulau Pari (Jakarta Bay), the Inner bay of Ambon (Mollucas), Lombok and Sumbawa Islands (Nusa Tenggara), and Spermonde reef (South Sulawesi) (Lilley, 2001). In the Spermonde Archipelago, T. geoffroyi was found to be primarily free-living, occurring in shallow, nearshore (0-3 m depth) and deeper offshore (algal flats at 25-50 m depth) soft bottom habitats (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). The genus Trachyphyllia has been recorded in the following collection sites: Banyuwangi (Bali Strait), West Bali (Bali Strait), Binuangeun (west Java), Gilmanuk, Jepara Central Java (Java Sea), Sibolga, North Sumatra (Indian Ocean) (Lilley, 2001).

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) recognises two separate species ( T. geoffroyi and W. radiata ) and stated that W. radiata occupied the same habitat as Trachyphyllia, and was widespread throughout Indonesian waters. However, Suharsono (2008a) indicated that W. radiata was scattered throughout Indonesian waters but that is was not common and usually living on sandy substrates in quiet waters.

A number of surveys have recorded the presence of T. geoffroyi in Indonesia:

• In nine different areas visited during the Snellius-II Expedition in 1984 (Best et al ., 1989), 54 T. geoffroyi was found at three: North East Komodo, Sumbawa and South West Sulawesi. • During a Marine Rapid Assessment Program at the Togean and Banggai Islands in Sulawesi in 1998, a total of 47 sites were visited and T. geoffroyi was found at two (Allen and McKenna, 2001). • Bruckner and Borneman (2006) undertook a survey of 12 locations in the Spermonde Archipelago in South West Sulawesi, an area with approximately 150 islands which they reported was the largest coral collection area in Indonesia. Their observations of T. geoffroyi included isolated attached colonies with growth forms that have previously been identified as Wellsophyllia radiata (Bruckner and Borneman, 2006). • The species was recorded in Pulau dua kecil, Luwuk Pensinsula, Sulawesi (Scaps and Runtukahu, 2008). • During rapid ecological assessments at Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia in 2001, a total of 45 sites were surveyed for corals and T. geoffroyi was found at two (McKenna et al ., 2002); in 2002 a total of 51 sites were surveyed for corals and T. geoffroyi was found at one (Donnelly et al. , 2003). • The species was found in Bali and adjacent regions, including Komodo (East Nusa Tenggara Province), Wakatobi (South Sulawesi), Derewan (East Kalimantan) and Bunaken National Park (North Sulawesi) (Turak and deVantier, 2011); a survey of four sites in Bali confirmed the genus at one site (Hoeksema and Putra, 2000). • In Bunaken National Park in North Sulawesi it was considered to have a locally restricted distribution, occurring in 5% of the 39 sites surveyed (Turak and DeVantier, 2003).

The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) stated that the species was very common in sheltered areas such as around continental islands and in inter-reef areas. The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) considered the species to be abundant, with small and large colonies usually found together and colonies numbering in the hundreds to thousands in one area (clumped distribution). Best et al ., (1989) considered the species to be uncommon. Bruckner and Borneman (2006) referred to Trachyphyllia as “unusual and/or uncommon corals most preferred by collectors”. During a survey of the reefs of the Pulisan region, north-east Sulawesi, Scaps et al . (2007) remarked that “Some monospecifc genera that were not observed in our study (Catalaphyllia, Stylarea, Australomussa, Cynarina, Trachyphyllia ) can be considered as rare.” Trachyphyllia was considered to be rare in the vicinity of Kapoposang Island during a study in 1996 (Yusuf and Rani, 2006, in: Yusuf and Jompa, 2012). In Bunaken National Park in North Sulawesi, Turak and DeVantier (2003) suggested that species with average rank abundance of < 1.5 may not form locally-reproductive populations. Using a methodology based on size of colony and frequency of occurrence, Suharsono and Giyanto (2006) described Trachyphyllia as rare in Kepulauan Seribu, suggesting that harvest should be strictly limited.

Bruckner and Borneman (2006) reported densities of <0.3 colonies/m 2 from the Spermonde Archipelago, and Raymakers (2001) reported densities of 0.1/m 2 (10/100m 2) and 0.28/m 2 (28/100 m2). In Lampung Bay, Lilley (2001) indicated that the estimated population density of T. geoffroyi was 0.45/m 2 (45 colonies per 100 m2) with sizes smaller than 50 cm. Overall Raymakers (2001) categorised T. geoffroyi as threatened to a lesser extent (of those reviewed by that author) with a low estimated abundance – 20-50 colonies/100 m 2 (based on densities in Spermonde, Sumatra) and Lampong, Sulawesi) and a high export quota.

Bruckner and Borneman (2006) estimated that the quota for this species represented only 1.9% of the total population in Spermonde. They found that collectors preferentially targeted colourful red and green morphs, which may be more vulnerable to overcollection. Lilley (2001) noted that T. geoffroyi has been collected for at least 15 years in Lampung Bay, and that the red-coloured specimens were most sought-after , fetching a higher price than specimens of other colours. The Scientific Authority of Indonesia (2014) also noted that fishermen only collect the bright and colourful corals but not the dark brown and pale corals.

Bruckner and Borneman (2006) suggested that localized declines in Trachyphyllia may occur as a result of collection pressures, but a few individuals of a species will probably remain in other 55 habitats because they are not the preferred colour morph, shape, or size, or because they have experienced partial mortality and are not desirable targets.

56 References

Allen, G.R. 2008. Conservation hotspots of biodiversity and endemism for Indo-Pacific coral reef fishes. Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems , 18: 541–556. Allen, G.R. and McKenna, S.A. (Eds.) 2001. A marine rapid assessment of the Togean and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia . RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment No. 20. Conservation International, Washington D.C., USA. 145 pp. Asian Development Bank 2014. State of the coral triangle: Indonesia . Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong City, Philippines. 69 pp. Atkinson, M., Kerrigan, B., Roelofs, A. and Smith, T. 2008a. Non detriment finding for CITES- listed corals in the Queensland coral fishery. Case study 4. In: NDF Workshop Case Studies, WG9-Aquatic Invertebrates . International Expert Workshop on CITES Non- Detriment Finding, Cancun, Mexico. Bentley, N. 1998. An overview of the exploitation, trade and management of corals in Indonesia. TRAFFIC Bulletin , 17(2): 67–78. Best, M.B. and Hoeksema, B.W. 1987. New observations on scleractinian corals from Indonesia: 1. Free-living species belonging to the Faviina. Zoologische Mededelingen , 61(27): 387–403. Best, M.B., Hoeksema, B.W., Moka, W., Moll, H., Suharsono and Nyoman Sutarna, I 1989. Recent Scleractinian coral species collected during the Snellius-II expedition in Eastern Indonesia. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research , 23(2): 107–115. Borneman, E. 2002. Do you know where your corals are coming from? Ecological information for aquarists from coral collection areas in Indonesia. Advanced Aquarist , 1(3). Borneman, E. 2008. Elegance corals; sustainability and disease impacting Catalaphyllia jardinei (Wells 1972) in the aquarium trade. Reefkeeping , 6(12). Bruckner, A.W. 2000. New threat to coral reefs: trade in coral organisms. Issues in Science and Technology , 17(1): 63–68. Bruckner, A.W. 2001. Tracking the trade in ornamental coral reef organisms: the importance of CITES and its limitations. Aquarium Sciences and Conservation , 3(1): 79–94. Bruckner, A.W. and Borneman, E.H. 2006. Developing a sustainable harvest regime for Indonesia’s stony coral fishery with application to other coral exporting countries. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Coral Reef Symposium. Okinawa, Japan. 28 June - 2 July 2004 . 1692–1697. Burke, L., Reytar, K., Spalding, M. and Perry, A. 2011. Reefs at risk revisited . World Resources Institute, Washington D.C., USA. 130 pp. Cairns, S. 2014. Dendrophyllia fistula Alcock, 1902. Available at: World Register of Marine Species at http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=210751 [Accessed: 2015-03-03]. Cairns, S.D., Hoeksema, B.W. and van der Land, J. 1999. Appendix: List of extant stony corals. Atoll Research Bulletin , 459: 13–46. Center for Ocean Solutions 2009. Pacific Ocean synthesis - scientific literature review of coastal and ocean threats, impacts, and solutions . The Woods Center for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 162 pp. Chou, L.M., Huang, D., Tun, K.P.P., Kwik, J.T.B., Chieh Tay, Y. and Seow, A.L. 2010. Temporal changes in reef community structure at Bintan Island (Indonesia) suggest need for integrated management. Pacific Science , 64(1): 99–111. Crabbe, M. J. C. and Smith, D. J. 2003. Computer modelling and estimation of recruitment patterns of nonbranching coral colonies at three sites in the Wakatobi Marine Park, S.E. Sulawesi, Indonesia; implications for coral reef conservation. Computational Biology and Chemistry, 27: 17-27. Dai, C., Fan, T. and Yu, J. 2000. Reproductive isolation and genetic differentiation of a scleractinian coral Mycedium elephantotus . Marine Ecology Progress Series , 201: 179–187. Devantier, L., Turak, E. and Skelton, P. 2006. Ecological assessment of the coral communities of Bunaken National Park: indicators of management effectiveness. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Coral Reef Symposium. Okinawa, Japan. 28 June - 2 July 2004 . 175–187.

Dikou, A. and van Woesik, R. 2006. Survival under chronic stress from sediment load: spatial patterns of hard coral communities in the southern islands of Singapore. Marine pollution 57 bulletin , 52(1): 7–21. Dinesen, Z.D. 1983. Shade-dwelling corals of the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Ecology-Progress Series , 10: 173–185. Dirhamsyah, D. 2006. Indonesian legislative framework for coastal resources management: A critical review and recommendation. Ocean & Coastal Management , 49(1-2): 68–92. Donnelly, R., Neville, D. and Mous, P.J. 2003. Report on a rapid ecological assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia held October 30 – November 22, 2002. Final Draft November 2003 . The Nature Conservancy - Southeast Asia Center for Marine Protected Areas, Bali, Indonesia. 246 pp. Donnelly, R., Neville, D. and Mous, P.J. 2003. Report on a rapid ecological assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua, Eastern Indonesia held October 30 – November 22, 2002. Final Draft November 2003 . The Nature Conservancy - Southeast Asia Center for Marine Protected Areas, Bali, Indonesia. 246 pp. Ferse, S.C.A., Knittweis, L., Krause, G., Maddusila, A. and Glaser, M. 2012. Livelihoods of ornamental coral fishermen in South Sulawesi/Indonesia: implications for management. Coastal Management , 40(5): 525–555. GCRMN 2010. Status of coral reefs in East Asian seas region: 2010 . Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, Ministry of the Environment, Japan, Tokyo, Japan. 121 pp Glaser, M., Baitoningsih, W., Ferse, S.C.A., Neil, M. and Deswandi, R. 2010. Whose sustainability? Top-down participation and emergent rules in marine protected area management in Indonesia. Marine Policy , 34(6): 1215–1225. Giyanto 2011. Changes in coral coverage in the eastern Indonesia during COREMAP2 . Research Centre for Oceanography – Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI). 1 pp. Giyanto 2012. Ekosistem pesisir ternate, tidore dan sekitarnya, provinsi maluku utara. [Coastal ecosystems of Ternate, Tidore Area, North Maluku Province]. Pusat Penelitian Oseanografi, lembaga ilmu pengetahuan Indonesia, Jakarta. Green, E.P. and Shirley, F. 1999. The global trade in corals . WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 10, Cambridge, UK. Hoeksema, B. 2014. Wellsophyllia radiata Pichon, 1980. World Register of Marine Species. Available at http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=739685 [Accessed: 2015-03-03]. Hoeksema, B. 2003. Mushroom coral species and scleractinian genera. Rapid Ecological Assessment Wakatobi National Park. In: Pet-Soedee, L. and Erdmann, M. (Eds.). Rapid Ecological Assessment Wakatobi National Park . The Nature Conservancy and WWF. 65–74. Hoeksema, B., Rogers, A. & Quibilan, M. 2008. Heliofungia actiniformis . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3 Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 14/03/2015] Hoeksema, B.W. 1991. Control of bleaching in mushroom coral populations (Scleractinia: Fungiidae) in the Java Sea: stress tolerance and interference by life history strategy. Marine Ecology Progress Series 74: 225-237. Hoeksema, B.W. 2012. Distribution patterns of mushroom corals (Scleractinia: Fungiidae) across the Spermonde shelf, South Sulawesi. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology , 60(1): 183–212. Hoeksema, B.W. and Putra, K.S. 2000. The reef coral fauna of Bali in the centre of marine diversity. In: Moosa, M.K., Soemodihardjo, S., Soegiarto, A., Romimohtarto, K., Nontji, A., Soekamo and Suharsono (Eds.). Proceedings 9th International Coral Reef Symposium. Bali, Indonesia. 23-27 October 2000. Vol. 1 . 173–178. Hopley, D. & Suharsono, 2000. The status of coral reefs in eastern Indonesia . Australian Institute of Marine Science. Indarjo, A., Wijatmoko, W. and Munasik. 2004. Kondisi Terumbu Karang di Perairan Pulau Panjang Jepara [Conditions of Coral Reefs in Long Island, Jepara]. Ilmu Kelautan , 9(4): 217- 224. IUCN 2014. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species . Version 2014.2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 22/10/2014]. Johan, O., Priyadi, A., Nurhidayat, Ginanjar, R., Wartono, H. and Ruspandy 2014. Karang hias di kabupaten Belitung Timur. In: Konferensi Nasional IX Pengelolaan Sumgerdaya Pesisir, Laut dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil . Surabaya.

Jones, R. 2008. CITES, corals and customs: The international trade in wild corals. In: Leewis, R.J. 58 and Janse, M. (Eds.). Advances in coral husbandry in public aquariums . Burgers’ Zoo, Arnhem, the Netherlands. 351–361. Jonker, L. and Johan, O. 1999. Checklist of the Scleractinian coral species from the waters of Padang (West Sumatra, Indonesia) held in the coral collection of Bung Hatta University. The Beagle: Records of the Museums and Art Galleries of the Northern Territory , 15: 47-54. Knittweis, L. and Wolff, M. 2010. Live coral trade impacts on the mushroom coral Heliofungia actiniformis in Indonesia: Potential future management approaches. Biological Conservation , 143: 2722–2729. Knittweis, L., J. Jompa, C. Richter and Wolff, M. 2009. Population dynamics of the mushroom coral Heliofungia actiniformis in the Spermonde Archipelago, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Coral Reefs , 28: 793–804. Lilley, G. 2001. A review of Indonesian corals in trade with reference to their trade, population status and distribution in Indonesia. Medan, Indonesia. 47 pp. McKenna, S.A., Allen, G.R. and Suryadi, S. (Eds.) 2002. A Marine Rapid Assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia . RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment No. 22. Conservation International, Washington D.C., USA. 193 pp. Munasik and Siringoringo, R. M. 2011. Struktur Komunitas Karang Keras (Scleractinia) di Perairan Pulau Marabatuan dan Pulau Matasirih, Kalimantan Selatan [Community Structure of Hard Corals (Scleractinia) in Water Island Marabatuan and Matasirih Island, South Kalimantan]. Ilmu Kelautan, 16(1): 49-58. NOAA 2012. Management report for 82 corals status review under the Endangered Species Act: existing regulatory mechanisms and conservation efforts . Pacific Islands Regional Office, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Department of Commerce. 152 pp. Puspitasari, L., Samino, S. and Retnaningdyah, C. 2013. Alteration of Coral Reef Community Structure Caused by Athropogenic Activity in the Coastal Area of Giliketapang Island, Probolinggo, East Java, Indonesia. The Journal of Tropical Life Science , 3(1): 23-27. Putra, S. A., Damar, A. and Samosir, A. M. 2014. Colonization of coral communities in the Krakatau Islands strict marine nature reserve, Indonesia. Ilmu Kelautan , 19(2): 63-74. Rachello-Dolmen, P. G. and Cleary, D. F. R. 2007. Relating coral species traits to environmental conditions in the Jakarta Bay/Pulau Seribu reef system, Indonesia. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science , 73 (3-4), p.816–826. Raymakers, C. 2001. Review of trade in live corals from Indonesia . TRAFFIC Europe, Brussels, Belgium. 66 pp. Reksodihardjo-Lilley, G. and Lilley, R. 2007. Towards a sustainable marine aquarium trade : An Indonesian perspective. SPC Live Reef Information Bulletin , 17: 11–19. Rhyne, A.L., Tlusty, M.F. and Kaufman, L. 2014. Is sustainable exploitation of coral reefs possible? A view from the standpoint of the marine aquarium trade. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability , 7: 101–107. Roelofs, A. and Silcock, R. 2008. A vulnerability assessment of coral taxa collected in the Queensland Coral Fishery . Brisbane, Australia: Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Samedi and Liman, P.D. 2002. Management measures and CITES trade controls for the stony coral trade in Indonesia. In: Bruckner, A.W. (Ed.). Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Trade in Stony Corals: Development of sustainable management guidelines. Jakarta, Indonesia. 9-12 April 2001 . NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-23, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA. 64–67. Scaps, P. and Runtukahu, F. 2008. Assessment of the coral reefs of the Luwuk Peninsula, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Bulletin de la Société zoologique de France , 133(4): 341–355. Scaps, P., Denis, V., Berhimpon, S. and Runtukahu, F. 2007. Zooxanthellate Scleractinian corals of the northern coast of Sulawesi. Atoll Research Bulletin , 553: 1–23. Scientific Authority of Indonesia 2014. Scientific Authority of Indonesia in litt . to UNEP-WCMC. Report of Indonesian corals for consultation concerning status of several species exporting to EU. Research Centre for Oceanography – the National Institute of Science. 29/10/2014. Sheppard, A., Fenner, D., Edwards, A., Abrar, M. and Ochavillo, D. 2014. Mycedium elephantotus The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 11/02/2015].

Sheppard, C., Turak, E. & Wood, E. 2008. Trachyphyllia geoffroyi . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 02/03/2015] 59 Sheppard, C., Turak, E. & Wood, E. 2014. Hydnophora microconos . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 15/03/2015] Siringoringo, R.M. and Hadi, T.A. 2013. Diversity of stony corals in banggai water. Marine Research Indonesia , 38(1): 9–19. Souhoka, J. 2009. Condition and diversity of hard coral at Nusalaut Island, Central Maluku. Jurnal Perikanan [J. Fish. Sci.] XI (1): 54-65. Suharsano and Bruckner, A.W. 2008. Evaluation of non-detriment finding for trade in stony corals from Indonesia. Case study 5. NDF Workshop Case Studies, WG9-Aquatic Invertebrates , Suharsono 2008a. Jenis-jenis karang di Indonesia . Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Jakarta, Indonesia. 375 pp. Suharsono 2008b. Managing Indonesian coral reefs: lessons from coral reef rehabilitation and management program. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Coral Reed Symposium. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. 7-11 July 2008 . Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA. 1153–1155. Suharsono and Giyanto 2006. A formulation approach to quantify the abundance of coral genera. Marine Research Indonesia , 31: 1–11. Sutherland, K.P., Porter, J.W. and Torres, C. 2004. Disease and immunity in Caribbean and Indo- Pacific zooxanthellate corals. Marine Ecology Progress Series , 266 (Table 1): 273–302. Timotius, S., Idris and Syahrir, M. 2009. A review on ornamental coral farming effort in Indonesia. In: International Ocean Science, Technology and Policy Symposium, World Ocean Conference 2009. Manado, Indonesia. 12-14 May 2009 . Titlyanov, E.A. and Titlyanova, T. V 2002. Reef-building Corals-Symbiotic Autotrophic Organisms: 1. General Structure, Feeding Pattern, and Light-Dependent Distribution in the Shelf. Russian Journal of Marine Biology , 28(0): S1–S15. Turak, E and deVantier, L. 2011. Field guide to reef-building corals of Brunei Darussalam . Fisheries Dept. Ministry of Industry and Primary resources. Pp 256. Turak, E. and DeVantier, L. 2003. Reef-building corals of Bunaken National Park, North Sulawesi, Indonesia: rapid ecological assessment of biodiversity and status . International Ocean Institute Regional Centre for Australia & the Western Pacific. 66 pp. Turak, E. and DeVantier, L. 2011. Biodiversity and conservation priorities of reef-building corals in Bali, Indonesia. In: Mustika, P.L.K., Ratha, I.M.J. and Saleh, P. (Eds.). RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment: Bali Marine Rapid Assessment Program 2011 . Conservation International. 78–130. Turak, E., Sheppard, C. & Wood, E. 2008a. Scolymia vitiensis . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 11/03/2015] Turak, E., Sheppard, C. & Wood, E. 2008b. Nemenzophyllia turbida . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 14/03/2015] Turak, E., Sheppard, C. & Wood, E. 2008c. Blastomussa wellsi . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 22/03/2015] Turak, E., Sheppard, D. and Wood, E. 2008d. Catalaphyllia jardinei. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 11/02/2015]. Turak, E., Sheppard, C. & Wood, E. 2014a. Plerogyra sinuosa . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 03/03/2015] Turak, E., Sheppard, C. & Wood, E. 2014b. Euphyllia cristata . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 07/03/2015] UNEP-WCMC 2012. Taxonomic checklist of all CITES-listed coral species, based on information compiled by UNEP-WCMC 2012 . (See CoP16 Doc 43.1 Annex 5.1 and 5.2) UNEP-WCMC 2014 Review of corals from Indonesia (coral species subject to EU decisions where identification to genus level is acceptable for trade purposes). UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge van der Horst, C.J. 1922. Siboga-Expeditie Monographes. The Madreporaria of the Siboga Expedition. Part III. Eupsammidae . 16c: 46 [98] - 75 [127]. van der Meij, S.E.T., Suharsono and Hoeksema, B.W. 2010. Long-term changes in coral assemblages under natural and anthropogenic stress in Jakarta Bay (1920-2005). Marine Pollution Bulletin 60_1442-1454. van Woesik, R. 1997. A Comparative Survey of Coral Reefs in Southeastern Bali, Indonesia, 1992 and 1997. Unpublished report.

Veron, J.E.N. 2000. Corals of the world . 3rd Ed. Stafford-Smith, M. (Ed.). Australian Institute of 60 Marine Science, Townsville, Australia. Veron, J.E.N. 2014. Results of an update of the Corals of the World Information Base for the Listing Determination of 66 Coral Species under the Endangered Species Act. Report to the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. Honolulu: Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. 11 pp. + Appendices. Veron, J.E.N. and Hodgson, G.A. 1989. Annotated checklist of the hermatypic corals of the Philippines. Pacific Science, 43(3): 234 -287. Wabnitz, C., Taylor, M., Green, E. and Razak, T. 2003. From ocean to aquarium: The global trade in marine ornamental species . UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. 66 pp. Wallace, C. C. 1999. Staghorn Corals of the World: a revision of the coral genus Acropora. CSIRO, Collingwood. Wilkinson, C. 2004. Status of coral reefs of the world: 2004 . 1st Ed. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, Australia. Wilkinson, C. 2008. Status of coral reefs of the world: 2008 . Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network and Reef and Rainforest Research Centre, Townsville, Australia. Wilson J.R., Ardiwijaya, R.L. and Prasetia, R. 2012. A Study of the Impact of the 2010 Coral Bleaching Event on Coral Communities in Wakatobi National Park . The Nature Conservancy. 29 pp. Wood, E. 2001. Global advances in conservation and management of marine ornamental resources. Aquarium Sciences and Conservation , 3(1): 65–77. Wood, E., Malsch, K. and Miller, J. 2012. International trade in hard corals: review of management, sustainability and trends. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Coral Reef Symposium. Cairns, Australia. 9-13 July 2012 . 9–13. Wood, E.M. 1983. Corals of the world . TFH Publishing Ltd, Surrey, UK. Yap, M., Roeroe, K.A., Lalamentik, L.T.X. and Okamoto, M. 2013. Recruitment patterns and early growth of acroporid corals in Manado, Indonesia. Fisheries Science , 79(3): 385–395. Yusuf, S. and Jompa, J. 2012. First quantitative assessment of coral bleaching on Indonesian reefs. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Coral Reef Symposium. Cairns, Australia. 9-13 July 2012 . Yusuf, S. and Rani, C. 2006. Environmental characteristic of ornamental corals (Scleractinia) in the Spermonde Islands, South Sulawesi. Torani Journal of Marine Science , 4: 241–247.

Appendix 61 Table 1: Purpose of trade

Code Description

T Commercial

Z Zoo

G Botanical garden

Q Circus or travelling exhibition

S Scientific

H Hunting trophy

P Personal

M Medical (including biomedical research)

E Educational

N Reintroduction or introduction into the wild

B Breeding in captivity or artificial propagation

L Law enforcement / judicial / forensic

Table 2: Source of specimens

Code Description

W Specimens taken from the wild

R Ranched specimens: specimens of animals reared in a controlled environment, taken as eggs or juveniles from the wild, where they would otherwise have had a very low probability of surviving to adulthood

D Appendix-I animals bred in captivity for commercial purposes in operations included in the Secretariat's Register, in accordance with Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), and Appendix-I plants artificially propagated for commercial purposes, as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Convention

A Plants that are artificially propagated in accordance with Resolution Conf. 11.11 (Rev. CoP15), as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 5 (specimens of species included in Appendix I that have been propagated artificially for non-commercial purposes and specimens of species included in Appendices II and III)

C Animals bred in captivity in accordance with Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.), as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 5

F Animals born in captivity (F1 or subsequent generations) that do not fulfil the definition of ‘bred in captivity’ in Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.), as well as parts and derivatives thereof

U Source unknown (must be justified)

I Confiscated or seized specimens (may be used with another code)

O Pre-Convention specimens