FJM 152
Julia Baker
FIJI MARINE
CONSERVATION & DIVING
Beqa Island, Fiji
FJM Phase 152 Science Report
April 2015 – June 2015
Author; Julia Baker MSc BSc (Hons) (Principal Investigator)
1
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Field Staff
Staff member
Role
Brittany Walters(BW)
Project Manager
Julia Baker(JB)
Principal Investigator
Alice Clemet(AC)
Dive Officer
Kathryn Ayres(KA)
Assistant Research Officer
Emily Hooper(EH)
Assistant Research Officer
2
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Frontier .................................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Location ................................................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Background ........................................................................................................................... 6
1.3.1 Natural Sources of Reef Degradation ................................................................................. 7
1.3.2 Anthropogenic Sources of Reef Degradation ..................................................................... 7
1.4 Project Aim and Objectives ................................................................................................... 9
1.5 Phase Achievements .............................................................................................................. 9
2. Training ............................................................................................................................... 10
2.1 Briefing................................................................................................................................ 10
2.2 Science lectures ................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 Field work training .............................................................................................................. 11
2.4 BTEC................................................................................................................................... 11
3. Research Work Program ................................................................................................... 12
3.1 Survey areas ........................................................................................................................ 12
3.2 A Baseline Survey of Coral Reef Health within Beqa Lagoon ........................................... 13
3.2.1Abstract...................................................................................................... ........... 13
3.2.2 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 14
3.2.3 Methodology ....................................................................................................... 14
3.2.4 Results ................................................................................................................. 18
3.2.5 Discussion ........................................................................................................... 21
4. Proposed work programme for next phase ...................................................................... 22
5. References............................................................................................................................ 23
6. Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 28
3
FJM 152
Julia Baker
1. Introduction
1.1 Frontier
Frontier, established in 1989, is a UK-based non-profit NGO. Its mission statement is:
“to conserve the world’s most endangered wildlife and threatened habitats and to build
sustainable livelihoods for marginalised and under resourced communities in the world’s
poorest countries and to create solutions that are apolitical, forward-thinking, communitydriven and innovative, and which take into consideration the long-term needs of low income
communities”.
Frontier employs non-specialist volunteers, or Research Assistants (RAs). Frontier’s marine
projects give RAs basic science and species identification training at the beginning of their
placement, to enable them to collect data on local fish, benthic and invertebrate species. After
working on Gau Island in Fiji conducting baseline surveys, Frontier relocated to Beqa Island,
south of mainland Fiji, in order to assess the status of the coral reef systems around Beqa and
within Beqa Lagoon.
1.2 Location
Fiji is an archipelago in the South Pacific Ocean composed of 332 islands and 500 islets and
cays, with land mass occupying 18,376 km² (Cumming et al., 2002) (Figure 1). Approximately
one third of the islands are inhabited and, of these, the two largest islands, Viti Levu and Vanua
Levu, contain approximately 90% of Fiji’s population (Vuki et al., 2000).
Figure 1: The Fiji Islands, Beqa circled in red (adapted from Veitayaki, 2006).
4
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Beqa is a large island in the Fijian archipelago and lies within Beqa Lagoon (Figure 2), with
the coordinates 18°24’S 178°08’E. The island is located approximately 10 km south of the
main island of Viti Levu and has a population of around 3,000 people. Nine villages are
present on Beqa, these are; Waisomo, Lalati, Soliyaga, Dukuni, Dakuibeqa, Naceva,
Naiseuseu, Rukua and Raviravi.
N
Figure 2: Beqa Island with surrounding barrier reef system (Google Earth)
images).
Fiji is world renowned as the Soft Coral Capital of the World and is also home to Beqa Lagoon,
which is famous amongst divers. It features over 50 world class dive sites and is frequented by
numerous species of mega fauna, including, dolphins, whales, sharks, rays and turtles. The
primary source of income on Beqa is tourism, largely through recreational scuba diving. No
large scale fishing, agriculture or horticulture occurs and heavy industry is non-existent,
therefore the reefs within Beqa Lagoon are unaffected by the potential negative environmental
impacts that such industries can bring.
Fiji's coral reef fisheries are mainly inshore, small-scale subsistence and artisanal fishers and are
therefore recognised as not receiving the management attention at a national level. The total
value of Fiji's subsistence and artisanal fisheries was US$64million (FAO 2007). Of Fiji's 400
traditional fishing grounds (qoliqoli), around 70 are over-expolited while 250 are fully
developed (Teh et al., 2009). Various no take or ‘tabua’ areas have been designated by chiefs of
the villages to try to control extraction levels as village population’s increase. The ‘tabua’ areas
surrounding Beqa can be seen in figure 3. Although village chiefs have no legal right to the
reefs, they traditionally lay claim to certain reefs within their territories and consequently have
the power to create ‘tabua’ areas on reefs of their choice in order to maintain populations of
targeted fish species for subsistence. This unofficial law is expected to be respected and adhered
to by all inhabitants of Beqa Island. Studies on other reefs elsewhere have shown that similar
traditional methods are an effective way to control and sustainably manage harvest rates of
5
FJM 152
Julia Baker
marine resources (Hoffmann, 2002).
Figure 3: Tabu areas around Beqa (FLMMA).
1.3 Background
Coral reefs are one of the most valuable resources on earth and provide an array of vital
ecosystem services (Done et al., 1996), with over one third of all described marine species
dependent upon coral reef ecosystems (Reaka-Kudla, 1996).
In recent years, coral reefs in the Southwest Pacific region have sustained large-scale damage as
a result of both natural phenomena and anthropogenic activities (Lovell et al. 2004). One
hundred years ago the reefs were pristine, human populations were low and fish were harvested
only for subsistence (Lovell et al. 2004). Even 30 years ago, remote reefs remained healthy,
however, reefs near dense populations began to be overexploited. Some Marine Protected
Areas (MPAs) had been created, however, the threats to coral reefs were not yet fully
understood. In the last 20 years, pollution, sedimentation and overfishing around dense
population centres have increased. As a result, MPA’s and non-protected areas near urban areas
have incurred significant stress and consequently their health has declined. Most other reefs
situated in rural and isolated areas have remained healthy and many are even recovering from
mass bleaching events in 2000 and 2002, still, recovery rates vary between sites, with some
showing complete recovery and others showing minimal or no recovery. Beqa Barrier Reef in
particular has been showing a slow recovery rate (Lovell et al., 2004).
6
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Fiji is dependent on its low lying coastal regions for its socio-economic development (Tec et
al., 2008). This, like many other South Pacific islands, makes it extremely vulnerable to the
impacts climate change. Current predictions indicate a potential rise in global sea levels of
between 49.9cm to 1m by 2100 (Solomon et al., 2009). A rise of this size would cause wise
spread devastation to Fiji's coastal infrastructure and artificial preservation would be a
substantial drain on Fiji's economy. In addition, the frequency of destructive environmental
events are predicted to increase, occurring at a greater frequency than potential recovery
(Hutchings et al., 2008).
1.3.1 Natural Sources of Reef Degradation
Natural sources of coral reef degradation include cyclones, coral bleaching and invasive
predator outbreaks. 64% of all coral colonies surrounding Fiji suffered mass bleaching in
2000 and in the southern areas of Viti Levu 84% of colonies were affected (Cumming et al.,
2002). Since 2002, significant damage has been sustained on coral reefs within the
Southwest Pacific region as a result of cyclones (Lovell et al., 2004). Coral predator
outbreaks, specifically the Crown of Thorn starfish (Acanthaster planci), have occurred on
Fijian reefs since 1965, for periods ranging from two to five years and continue to this day
(Zann et al., 1990). This can be attributed to natural fluctuations in availability of planktonic
food, water salinity levels and temperature.
1.3.2 Anthropogenic Sources of Reef Degradation
The main anthropogenic sources of reef degradation include overfishing, destructive fishing
practices (such as dynamite fishing), poisoning, pollution, deforestation and coral harvesting
for the curio and marine aquarium trade (Vuki et al., 2000; Lovell, 2001, Teh et al., 2009).
Overfishing in Fiji has significantly reduced populations of certain species of reef fish,
including three species of Lethrinus; the thumbprint emperor (Lethrinus harak), yellowlip
emperor (Lethrinus xanthochilus) and spangled emperor (Lethrinus nebulosus).
The fisheries sector is the third largest natural resource sector in Fiji. The main sources of
foreign exchange are the tourism industry (contributing 19% to GDP), sugar industry
(contributing 8.5%) and then fisheries (contributing 2.5%). Understanding the role of societal
and economic factors on fishing is critical for designing appropriate fisheries management
strategies. Teh et al., 2009 produced an overview of the socio-economic and ecological
perspectives of Fiji’s inland reef fisheries. The result from this overview was that status of Fiji’s
reef-associated fisheries at national level is still uncertain due to lack of dependable data on the
subsistence fisheries.
Since the 1990's there's been increasing pressure on small scale fisheries due to growing
population and demand for fish. A socio-economic study done in Beqa villages Rukua and
Yanuca reported that of the fish caught locally 54% were consumed by the local community
while 46% were either sold outside or to a middleman/agent, presumably to an outside source
(MRIS 2012). Common methods for targeting reef fish species include: hand-line, spear, gillnet,
seine net, hookah (diving with surface supplied air) and reef gleaning (Teh et al., 2009). Of
these methods hand-lining and spearfishing are used most frequently by residents of Rukua and
Yanuca (MRIS 2012). Commercial fishing does not occur near the island of Beqa, however,
overfishing in other areas may have reduced population numbers to such an extent that species
such as L. harak, L. xanthochilus, L nebulosus and B. muricatum are not present or very rarely
encountered. Other species such as the bumphead parrotfish (Bolbometopon muricatum), have
now become almost completely extinct in Fijian waters (Cumming et al., 2002). Lack of long
7
FJM 152
Julia Baker
term monitoring and limited technical expertise hinders assessment of the coral reef fisheries.
There's been numerous site-specific studies yet no national level evaluation of Fiji's reef fisheries. To
tackle this at a national level the Fisheries Division, Fiji Locally Managed Marine Areas (FLMMA)
and the University of the South Pacific have started facilitating coral reef conservation initiatives by
conducting socio-economic surveys of marine resource use.
The marine aquarium trade inflicts reef degradation in a variety of ways. According to Fiji's
Fisheries Department annual estimate, 311,097 aquarium fish were exported from Fiji in 2001.
Convention of International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) database recorded that
169,143 ornamental fish and 31,900 invertebrates were exported from Fiji in 2004 to overseas
markets. It has also been reported that between 2000 and 2004 annual live rock exports from
Fiji increased from 800,000kg in 2000 to 1.3million kg. Live rock exports are a major problem
in Fiji as it significantly diminishes reef ecosystems by reducing the number of available
spawning sites for marine species, reducing the buffer areas for sites of increased wave action,
and decreasing carbon dioxide sequestration by reducing the amount of photosynthetic material
in the marine environment. In 2001, a reported 800,000 kg of ‘live rock’ was harvested and
exported; however the actual figure is likely much greater as a substantial quantity is lost in the
trimming and grading process (Lovell et al., 2004). Although this has not been observed around
Beqa, likely due to tourism being the main activity, there is potential for harvesting to occur in
the future.
Pollution in the form of sewage is a major threat to coral reefs in Fiji. Untreated sewage
deposited directly into the ocean causes increased levels of phosphates and consequently macro
algal blooms and eutrophication (Ginsberg 1994). Coral reefs are unique in that they possess
low levels of nutrients and are highly efficient at recycling them. Consequently, they can cope
with minor levels of eutrophication, however, when marine ecosystems are highly enriched
with chemical nutrients, the result is excessive plant growth in the form of macro algae. Such
algae are detrimental to the health of the reef because they use all available oxygen within the
water column, causing fish populations to die off. In addition, these algal blooms reduce the
amount of light penetrating the water column, inhibiting coral photosynthesis, subsequently
causing rapid declines in reef system biodiversity (Fabricius, 2005). Unmanaged disposal of
raw sewage is common in areas of dense population as well as in popular tourist destinations.
Villages on Beqa use pit latrines for sewage, however, because they are close to the coast it is
likely that nutrients leach through the soil into the surrounding coastal waters and increase
levels of phosphates and nitrates, which in turn negatively affect near shore reefs. It is unclear
how the resorts on Beqa manage their waste, but it is likely that septic tanks are employed.
Incidents of dumping on reefs along the Coral Coast of Viti Levu, Mamanuca and Suva have
been observed (Mosley and Aalbersberg, 2002, Tamata and Thaman, 2001; Zann and Lovell,
1992).
Many families on Beqa lay claim to some plantain regions which they farm, both for local
consumption and trading as well as to sell on the mainland (MRIS 2012). It has been noted that
there has been an increase in the area of land cleared using slash and burn methodologies to
make room for these farms (pers comm, 2015). These areas of clearing will increase
sedimentation and the rate at which fresh water is being leached onto the reef. Mangrove forests
help stabilize shorelines, filter freshwater run off and reduce the impact of natural disasters such
as tsunamis and hurricanes. In addition, many of the reef fish targeted for consumption are
known to depend on the mangroves for refuge from predators and for ontological development
(FAO 2007, Giri et al., 2010). According to locals, the areas of mangroves have significantly
decreased and with the added impact of slash and burn techniques this is likely to continue (pers
comm, 2015). The combination of land clearing using slash and burn techniques as well as
mangrove deforestation will be having measureable impacts on the reef.
8
FJM 152
1.4
Julia Baker
Project Aims & Objectives
The overarching aim of the Fiji Marine Conservation project is to ascertain the health of the
reef through the use of baseline surveys in order to inform sustainable management.
Baseline surveys will be used to;
1. Indicate which natural and anthropogenic process currently effect the reef system.
2. Determine the effectiveness of the current locally managed marine areas.
3. Feed into national data collection objectives through Fiji Fisheries Department and
University of the South Pacific (USP)
4. Build awareness and education of local people as to the importance of sustained marine
management techniques with the hope to assist with the long term sustainable use of
marine resources.
1.5
Phase Achievements
The overall objective of the phase was to continue to develop the project and expand the
data set. This entailed;
Camp and logistics:
 Improving training resources for RAs
 Mapping of current dive sites
 Deploying permanent transect markers at new site (Snapper)
 Redeploying mooring lines
 Improved living conditions of staff and volunteer accommodation
 New toilet
 Fiberglass work to boat hull of yellow boat
 Boat proposal
Scientific Development:
 Finalising learning materials and developing a survey methodology for invertebrates
 Development of species list to include commercially important families to species level
for future data collection
 Development of communications and methodologies to establish a shark research
aspect to project
 Strengthening links and communications to enable data transfer to national projects
Community:
 Develop relationship with local community by increasing number of trips to villages
through prearranging activities such as mat making
 Making contact with local education institutes to establish future collaborations
9
FJM 152
Julia Baker
2. Training
2.1 Briefing sessions





Orientation – staff member takes new volunteers around camp.
Bula and Welcome – staff member introduces all members of staff, other volunteers
and local Fijian family.
Intro to duties – staff member shows new volunteers rotor and where description of
duties can be found and outlines what needs doing for each duty.
Health and safety – staff member outlines important health and safety points for camp
and new volunteers then take health and safety and medical tests.
Dive Hazards – Dive officer explains the possible hazards of diving which may be
encountered as well as safety equipment used in case of an incident.
Briefing session
Presenter
Orientation
Bula and Welcome
Intro to Duties
Health and Safety
Dive Hazards
JB/AC
JB
JB/AC
JB/AC
AC
Table 1. Briefing sessions conducted during phase 152
2.2 Science lectures
Research assistants (RA’s), with the support of staff members, are fully responsible for all
data collection on FJM. Before RA’s were permitted to conduct surveys, rigorous testing was
undertaken. RA’s were given an array of lectures, computer ID tests and in-water ID tests. A
pass rate of 95% accuracy was required for theory tests and only when theory and in-water ID
tests have been completed were RA’s allowed to start surveying. RA’s were then required to
complete two practice surveys before actual benthic and fish surveys could be undertaken and
data recorded.
The science lectures given to guide learning are as follows;








Introduction to Coral Reefs – coral reef biology, function and threats
Fish Anatomy – important parts of fish biology which will help identify indicator and
family variances
Indicator Fish Species – distinguishing features of indicator fish species
Survey Methodology – underwater techniques and processes involved in conducting a
survey
Fish Morphology – distinguishing features which separate families
Other Butterflies and Damsels – illustrate which species may get confused with
indicator species
Benthic Forms – most common benthic forms found along transects
Invertebrates – common invertebrates found in the area and what they reflect about the
health of the reef
10
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Table 2. Science lectures conducted during phase 152
Science Lectures
Presenter
Introduction to Coral Reefs
Fish Anatomy
Indicator Fish Species
Survey Methodology
Fish Morphology
Other Butterflies and Damsels
Benthic Form
Invertebrates
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
EH/KA
Additional lectures were often held depending on interest on topics prepared by staff. To date
these have included; ethics of shark feeding and coral nurseries.
2.3 Field work training
The following computer ID tests were conducted before in-water tests and practice surveys
could be conducted:




Indicator fish species
Fish families
Master test – encompassing indicators, families and others
Benthic morphology
A dry run of survey methodology was also conducted in order to reinforce techniques before
conducing in-water surveys.
2.4 BTEC
4 BTEC’s were completed this phase, they are as follows:
1. Name: Holly Baigent
BTEC type: Tropical Habitat Conservation
Title: How fish abundance and species richness varies with depth.
Mentor: Kathryn Ayres
2. Name: Lucy Harding
BTEC type: Tropical Habitat Conservation
Title: How differing disturbance levels (in relation to time differences) affect recorded
fish abundance.
Mentor: Kristian Miles and Julia Baker
3. Name: Cliona O’Flaherty
BTEC type: Tropical Habitat Conservation
Title: Comparison of mean abundance of commercial fish families between no take and
take zones.
11
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Mentor: Kristian Miles and Julia Baker
4. Name: Karensa Rees
BTEC type: Tropical Habitat Conservation
Title: How does the abundance of carnivorous fish differ between nearshore, offshore
and inshore sites?
Mentor: Emily Hooper
3.
Research Work Program
3.1 Survey Areas
Beqa lies within Beqa Lagoon, with the coordinates 18°24’S 178°08’E. The island is located
approximately 10 km south of the main island of Viti Levu and has a population of around
3,000 people.
Six survey sites were used for reef data collection;
Table 3. Survey site coordinates and relevant projects
Site Name
Bikini
Mala’s
Rabbit
Vuvalae
Wreck Reef
Snapper
Lunch
Heaven
GPS coordinates
S 18˚23’40.1”
E 178˚05’26.0”
S 18˚24’10.5”
E 178˚05’58.2”
S 18˚24’.07.5”
E 178˚06’09.9”
S 18˚24’07.6”
E 178˚03’54.9”
S 18˚22’48.22”
E 178˚05’18.3”
S 18˚24’56.7”
E 178˚04’04.4”
S 18˚19’40.1”
E 178˚06'33.0"
Project
All
All
All
All
All
All
This is an old site and is no
longer surveyed but will feature
in this report to round off the
data collection to date
To be used for shark project, no
transects at this site currently
S 18˚25’26.5”
E 178˚04’42.0”
Bikini – A near-shore site (1.29 nautical miles from camp) protected from westerly
winds but is more prone to northerly, southerly and easterly winds. Average depth is
7.5m and a gentle slope drops down to a depth of 20 m on the outer reef. Bikini is
outside of Vaqa Bay and so will encounter freshwater dissipating out of the bay and
also from the local village of Rukua. The site is rarely visited by Beqa Lagoon Resort
for tourism. Bikini is a no take zone and so only fished on rare occasions when the chief
opens the site for fishing for celebrations or funerals.
Mala’s – An inshore site (0.56 nautical miles from camp) found within Vaqa Bay and
relatively protected from southerly and easterly winds. It is an estuarine environment
12
FJM 152
Julia Baker
with three freshwater streams flowing into it. The majority of the reef is at around 8 m,
whereas the outer reef is at around 18 m. It is near the local village of Neiseuseu and the
site is not visited for tourism and is a non-tabua area. Targeted fish include parrotfish,
unicornfish, porcupinefish, rabbitfish, surgeonfish and goatfish.
Rabbit – An inshore site (0.44 nautical miles from camp) located within Vaqa Bay close to river
outflows. The site is generally shallow with an average depth of 6 m dropping down to 12 m at
the reef edge. The site is not visited for tourism and is a no-take zone.
Vuvalae – an offshore site (2.53 nautical miles from camp) relatively protected from south
easterly, easterly and north easterly winds and usually is not subjected to strong currents. The
reef is extremely large, comprising of numerous patch reefs and coral bombies. The average
depth is around 8 m dropping down to 16 m at the reef’s edge. Vuvalae is located far away from
Beqa and can be difficult to get to because of rough weather conditions. It will encounter no
freshwater and there can often be strong currents. The site is not visited for tourism.
Wreck Reef – an offshore site (1.97 nautical miles from camp) very exposed with a purposesunk wreck is located on the seabed just off the reef at a depth of 22 m. The reef has an average
depth of 8 m, however, the edge of the reef has a steep drop off down to a depth of 22 m. There
can be strong currents present, however, the site is far enough away from freshwater sources to
not be affected by dissipation. The site is rarely visited by Beqa Lagoon Resort for tourism or
fishing by the locals.
Snapper – An offshore site (2.42 nautical miles from camp) relatively protected from south
easterly and north easterly winds. The reef has as average depth of 8.5 m with a drop off to 15 m
at the reef edge. Six large coral bombies surround the mooring line with depths ranging 3-6 m .
Transects are places on patch reefs with areas of sand.
Lunch – An offshore site (4.99 nautical miles from camp) very exposed and dramatically
affected by strong winds from all directions as a result. At high tide the survey area is
approximately 6 m, however, the site is also comprised of steep drop offs and coral bombies.
Lunch is located far away from Beqa and is very difficult to get to because of rough weather
conditions. It will encounter no freshwater and the site is not visited for tourism or fishing.
Lunch is no longer used for surveying.
Heaven – An offshore site (2.06 nautical miles from camp) to be used for the shark project. The
site is relatively protected from south easterly and north easterly winds. Average depth is
around 6 m, with drop offs to the west of the site down to a depth of 15 m. The site is mainly
patch reef with coral bombies to the east.
3.2 Baseline Survey of Coral Reef Health within Beqa Lagoon.
3.2.1 Abstract
Coral reefs are an intrinsic part of coastal Fijian life. Dependencies range from supporting a
multi-million dollar tourist industry, to directly supporting subsistence living of remote village
communities. FJM has been based on the island of Beqa for just under 2 years, with the goal to
conduct baseline surveys of the reefs in the area to ascertain reef health. To do this fish and
benthic surveys were conducted regularly across selected survey sites using baseline survey
protocol methodology. A total of 827 fish surveys have been conducted to date with results
showing variations between sites reflective of the natural and anthropogenic factors acting on
each site. As the programme moves into its next phase the project is being expanded to include
13
FJM 152
Julia Baker
additional surveying programmes to improve relevance and impact of the project.
3.2.2 Introduction
Beqa Island lies within Beqa Lagoon, 10 km south of the main island of Viti Levu. The island
is known for its traditional subsistence village lifestyles, as well as hosting a number of tourism
resorts (Burns 1994). Fiji Fisheries department currently monitor the area as part of their
national monitoring plan, however, surveys are only conducted once a year in different area
around Fiji due to personnel restrictions (personal coms). FJM’s presence on Beqa aims to
contribute to this knowledge gap by directly feeding survey results into work by WWF and
Fisheries department initiatives.
The most comprehensive assessment conducted by Fisheries to date was a resource survey for
Yanuca and Rukua villages in 2012 by the Marine Resource Inventory Survey (MRIS) team.
The overall goal of this survey was to formulate and later implement a management plan for
sustainable use of the marine resources. Methodologies included an underwater visual census
and socio-economic surveys. It was reported that the main source of income for villagers was
fishing and that over 90% of villagers “always” or “sometimes” consumed fresh fish in a week.
Also recorded was the most common fish species caught per fishing trip, the top 5 being;
E.polyphekadion, L.harak, L.atkinsoni, C.ignobilis and L.gibbus (MRIS 2012). The survey
identified that many of the marine inshore species that usually inhabit the Beqa reef system are
under threat due to the continued destruction of the reef system through anthropogenic activities
including; pollution from pig farms, reef-walking, over-fishing, anchor damage and the use of
destructive fishing methods. It was reported that many of the reefs in the region have a major
algae overgrowth problem with large areas of reef totally covered by algae thought to be
attributed to the combination of sewage stimulating algae growth and lack of major algae
grazers from overfishing.
Indicator species are used to infer reef health trends. Indicator families (emperors, butterflyfish,
angelfish, damsel fish and barracudas) are identified to species level as there are many interspecies variations. Angelfish show a preference for structurally complex reefs and are not
tolerant to fluctuations in physical variables such as temperature, while barracudas are very
tolerant due to ontological and seasonal shifts in habitat range (Christine 2010). Butterflyfish
are reported to be very sensitive to reef degradation and have species dependent feeding
preferences, while emperors display niche partitioning (Pratchett 2005, Carpenter and Allen
1989).
3.2.3 Materials and Methods
Baseline Survey Protocol (BSP) was used following standardised Reef Check methodology
(Hodgson, 2001). In order to initially set up the permanent transects, fifty metre survey tapes
were used to create transect lines spaced 10 m apart. Four permanent transect sites were set up
at each of the survey sites and highly visible markers deployed in order to allow RAs to easily
locate the transect start points. Transect bearings were kept consistent in order to obtain
independent samples to be replicated at each site. Transect lines were laid for a total length of
45 m and this permitted 2 x 20 metre transects to be completed separated by a 5 m gap. Benthic
data was collected using line intercept methodology, whereas fish surveys were completed
using belt transect methodology. During the fish surveyor methodology, RAs would lay the
survey tape, swim back to the start point, and wait five minutes for any disturbed fish to return
into the transect area. RA’s then swam the length of the survey tape recording all fish seen
within a 5m x 5m square from the base of the transect tape measure.
14
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Figure 4: Fish surveyor methodology, recording all fish seen within a 5m x 5m square
from the base of the transect tape measure.
Surveyor Roles: RAs undertook various roles during fish surveys depending on the data being
collected and the level of training they had received. As four weeks were required to become
fish survey proficient, any RAs on the project for less than four weeks were unable to survey
fish and would therefore occupy another surveyor role. Data was collected on fish biodiversity,
abundance and size.
Consequently, there were two surveyor roles; physical surveyor and fish surveyor. Provided
that research assistants were able to undertake all survey roles, the allocated role rotated on a
daily basis.
The role of the physical surveyor was to lead the dive and therefore keep track of all surveyors’
air consumption, dive depth and survey time, in addition to towing the surface marker buoy and
navigating bearings. The physical surveyor recorded the depth and time at the start and end of
each transect and navigated the set bearing of each transect whilst laying out the tape measure.
During fish surveys the physical surveyor remained behind the fish surveyor to reduce
disturbance to the fish within the transect area. On completion of the survey the physical
surveyor reeled in the tape. When surveying benthic forms, the benthic surveyor conducted the
survey with the physical surveyor swimming alongside.
Benthic forms were recorded using line-intercept methodology. Table 4 shows the forms the
benthos is categorised by during survey.
Table 4. Benthic morphologies
HARD CORAL MORPHOLOGIES
Branching (BR)
Digitate (DG)
Foliose (FO)
Tabular (TA)
Laminar (LA)
Hard corals which have extended protrusions of branches
(e.g. Acroporaspp.&Pocilloporaspp.)
Small and stout digits which protrude, often forming a
“finger”-like shape
Leaf-like or forming leafy folds radiated upwards from a
central point (e.g. Turbinariamesenterina)
Often with a digitate-like form on top but attached to the
substrate with a central stipend with a table-like top creating
a flat platform
Forming shelf-like plates growing horizontally which do not
15
FJM 152
Julia Baker
radiate from a central point (e.g. Montiporaspp.).
Massive (MA)
Sub-Massive (SM)
Solitary (SO)
Encrusting (EN)
Colony shape where height and width are similar, i.e.
forming solid, rounded or boulder-shaped masses, not sizelimited
Similar to massive corals, however these differ by having
extra columns or wedges protruding from the base
Grow as solitary, free-living individuals. Corralites
characterised by radial septa around a central cavity (e.g.
Fungiaspp.). Mushroom or slipper corals.
Corallites in a flat plain with the substrate and the substrate
below can be seen at the edges
OTHER BENTHOS
Sand (SA)
Fine granular material composed of rock and coral.
Rock (RK)
Geological feature composed of one or more minerals with
no visible corallites.
Unconsolidated fragments of dead coral unattached to the
substrate.
Diverse group of eukaryotes ranging from unicellular to
multicellular. Forms beds or turfs of macro-, micro- or
coralline algae.
Corals that do not produce a calcium carbonate skeleton.
Rubble (RB)
Algae (AL)
Soft Coral (SC)
Sponge (SP)
Seagrass (SG)
Soft porous body structures used filter feed. Can be
encrusting or free growing. Many shapes, sizes and colours
Angiosperms adapted to a marine environment.
Fish species richness, abundance and size were recorded using 5x5x20 m belt transects.
Research assistants learn forty-five indicator species and twenty other fish families. Fish size
was recorded in categories; 1-10 cm, 11-20 cm, 21-30 cm, 31-40 cm, 41-50 cm and >50 cm.
When a fish surveyor encountered a large school of fish, the abundance was estimated and
recorded in the most common average size category. Upon completion of a survey dive, RAs
directly enter their survey data into the master database.
3.2.4 Results - Survey Effort
Figure 5 shows the cumulative number of fish surveys conducted at each site between
September 2013 and May 2015. The total number of fish surveys conducted since September
2013 is 837. The site “Bikini” has been surveyed the most frequently followed by “Rabbit”,
“Mala’s”, “Wreck” and “Vuvalae”. Late in 2013 the site “Lunch” was decided to be too
exposed to be used as a survey site and therefore only has a total of 49 surveys. “Snapper” is a
new site and is yet to be surveyed for fish. Figure 6 shows the cumulative number of benthic
surveys conducted to date for which the raw data can be accessed. Benthic surveys have now
been re-introduced into surveying and results will be compared to the late 2013 survey results in
the next phase.
16
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Figure 5: A line graph to show the cumulative number of fish surveys conducted at each site during
FJM’s time on Beqa.
Figure 6: A line graph to show the cumulative number of benthic surveys conducted at each site during
FJM’s time on Beqa.
17
FJM 152
Julia Baker
3.2.4 Results – Benthic Forms
Figure 7 shows the results of the benthic surveys conducted in 2013. Benthic morphology is
grouped into 6 categories; rock, sand, dead coral, hard coral, soft coral and sponge. Site
“Bikini” shows the highest percentage of dead coral cover (84%) and lowest diversity of benthic
forms (table 5). Site “Mala’s” shows the highest sponge coverage (12.5%) and most even
spread of benthic coverage categories, with all 6 overarching categories represented. Site
“Lunch” was the only site where there was no sand cover.
100%
90%
Benthic Cover (%)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Rabbit
Lunch
Mala's
Wreck
Vuvale
Bikini
Site
Rock
Sand
Dead Coral
Hard
Soft
Sponge
Figure 7: A stacked column chart to show the percentage of benthic cover forms at each site across all 8
transects.
Table 5: Shannon’s Index and ENS values for benthic formations at each site.
Shannon's Index
ENS
Bikini
Lunch
Mala's
Rabbit
Vuvalai
Wreck
0.741938 1.842458 2.181872 1.781065 1.790583
1.41
2.100002 6.312032 8.862882 5.936173 5.992948
4.10477
18
FJM 152
Julia Baker
30
% Hard Coral Cover
25
20
15
10
5
0
Rabbit
Lunch
Mala's
Wreck
Vuvalai
Bikini
Site
Submassive
Encrusting
Tabular
Massive
Corymbose
Digitate
Branching
Laminar
Foliose
Solitary/Singular
Figure 8: A stacked column chart to show the percentage of hard coral cover at each site across all 8
transects.
As seen in figure 8, Mala’s” and “Vuvalai” show the highest percentage of hard coral cover.
However, “Mala’s” is the only site not to have the didgitate formation. “Mala’s” has the highest
percentage of laminar coral while “Vuvalai” and “Wreck” have a high percentage of branching
coral cover.
3.2.5 Results – Fish abundance and biodiversity
As seen in figure 9 “Mala’s” and “Rabbit” show the lowest average abundance of fish during
surveys and “Vuvalai” the highest. Comparably “Rabbit” and “Bikini” show the highest average
number of families recorded during surveying. Table 6 shows the ENS and Shannon index of
diversity for each site, confirming that “Bikini” and “Rabbit” have the highest diversity of
families and also the most even number of each of the families dominating at each site.
“Bikini”, “Rabbit” and “Lunch” survey sites have the highest abundance of fish in the larger
size categories (41-50cm and >50cm), as seen in figure 10. “Mala’s” is the only site to have no
fish surveyed in the upper two size categories.
Table 6: Shannon’s Index and ENS values for family diversity at each site.
Shannon's Index
ENS
Bikini
Lunch
Mala's
Rabbit
Vuvalai
Wreck
1.46
0.96
0.95
1.28
1.01
0.84
4.32
2.62
2.58
3.60
2.76
2.31
19
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Figure 9: A column and point chart to show the average abundance of fish seen and average number
of families seen per transect at each site.
Figure 10: A column chart to show the average size categories (cm) of fish per transect
at each site in cm.
20
FJM 152
Julia Baker
3.2.6 Discussion
Average fish abundance was recorded to be highest at sites “Vuvalai”, “Wreck” and “Lunch”.
All three of these sites are offshore sites and therefore are likely to encounter lower levels of
disturbance from boat traffic and are less accessible for fishing. In addition, offshore sites are
not as likely to encounter salinity, sediment, nitrate and phosphate fluctuations as would be
present at inshore sites due to their proximity to freshwater run off. Inshore sites showed the
lowest average abundance of fish per transect however were similar to the near shore and
offshore sites in terms of family richness. Inshore sites are closer to areas of mangroves that are
known to be vital habitats for juvenile reef fish, which may account for there being a
comparable number of families present to the offshore sites which many fish will migrate to as
they mature (FAO 2007). Of the indicator species used Angelfish are the least tolerant to
fluctuations in physical variables, especially temperature, as a temperature increase to 27
degrees C triggers gamete release (Olivotto et al., 2006). Angelfish were recorded to be in
higher abundance at nearshore and offshore sites, which supports the idea that these sites are
less influenced by fluctuating physical factors (appendix 2). Lower abundances of angelfish
were found at inshore sites where these fluctuations will be higher. To confirm the differences
in these fluctuations between near shore, offshore and inshore sites water quality testing would
need to be conducted.
Salinity, along with temperature and light penetration fluctuations are all factors widely
recognised to negatively affect coral species and therefore the biota they support (Coles and
Jokiel 1978). Despite this, “Mala’s”, one of the inshore sites, had the second highest hard coral
cover and highest evenness of hard coral forms. The inshore sites (Mala’s and Rabbit) are
likely to be most at risk from extreme salinity and nutrient variations, beyond the reef’s
threshold, as they are close to freshwater influxes and areas of deforestation using slash and
burn methods have been noted. These sites are also at risk of over fishing as they are easily
accessible by swimming or kayak from local villages. Inshore and near-shore sites were the
only sites where barracuda were recorded during surveys. This, again, is reflective of these sites
fluctuating in physical parameters due to freshwater fun off as Barracuda show ontological
habitat shifts from mangroves to coral reefs (Christine 2010).
Site Bikini was shown to have the highest cover of dead coral and lowest diversity of benthic
forms. This was reflected in the abundance of the emperors as indicators. Emperors exhibit
niche partitioning with many species showing a preference for shallow, sandy coral reefs that
have abundant reef rubble (Carpenter and Allen 1989). Site “Mala’s” has the most even cover
of the 6 benthic categories however the lowest fish abundance. Many reef fish, especially the
indicator species show varying preferences to varying benthic structures in order for each to
fulfil an ecological niche so it would be expected that by exhibiting the most diverse benthic
cover a high fish abundance would follow (Berumen et al. 2005). One possible explanation
for this may be that the site is being influenced by increased sedimentation from deforestation
and could be shifting to accommodate faster growing benthos such as sponge rather than
previously being dominated by hard corals. Sedimentation levels would need to be recorded in
order to confirm this. Tabular corals are known to be fast growing and provide shelter from
prevailing currents, which are more common in offshore sites (Baird and Huges 2000). This is
well represented in the results as the two sites known for exhibiting high currents (Vuvalai and
Lunch) have the highest cover of tabular corals. The presence of currents and the distance
needed to travel to reach offshore sites may unintentionally reduce fishing pressure, as these
factors would affect the ability and ease to conduct spear fishing. However, studies have shown
that species diversity increased with decreased wave exposure, which may outweigh the low
removal rate from fishing (Connell et al., 1997, Kilar and McLachlan, 1989;). During the
MRIS resource survey in 2012 of villages Rukua and Yanuca the most important fishing
21
FJM 152
Julia Baker
grounds were identified as lagoon, coastal reed and outer reef (including the passage)
successively. It is recommended that in future economic studies a map is provided to
demonstrate how far from the village fishing is conducted by each participant.
Sites “Bikini” and “Rabbit” had the highest family richness of all sites and fish were recorded
within all size categories. This resulted in these sites having the highest effective number of
species (ENS) value. These two sites are no-take zones, locally known as “Tabua” zones
whereby the local chief has enforced closure of the zone to extractive fishing techniques. This
may have contributed to the highest family richness as certain families and size categories are
not targeted and extracted by local fishers. Both of these sites are also within or close to Vaqa
Bay and consequently more protected from environmental stressors such as high wave
exposure which, as previously mentioned, can negatively impact community structure (Connell
et al., 1997, Kilar and McLachlan, 1989). During a socio-economic study conducted in 2012
(just prior to the enforcement of the tabu areas) questions were asked of locals that included:
sources of income, fish consumption, fishing habitats, time of fishing, use of fishing boats etc.
A second socio-economic study is to be conducted mid-2015 to determine if the introduction
have effected consumption and fishing practices (MRIS 2012). Bikini had the highest diversity
despite having the lowest diversity in coral cover and highest dead coral, which may be
indicative of the positive effects of reduced fishing pressure. If the corals at this site can
continue to recover it is likely that fish diversity will increase significantly.
The distributions of species concerning angelfish and barracuda have been graphed between
survey sites (Appendix 2) because angelfish use reef for habitat, recruitment and food, thus are
a good indication of reef health, and barracuda are piscivores, therefore, their presence
indicates a great availability of food (Rajeswari and Balasubramanian, 2014). One factor that
may influence abundance and richness of certain families is the time of day and tidal state.
Many coral reef fish are known to have preferences for when they engage in activities such as
feeding and spawning. For example, angelfish are most active in regards to mating from dawn
to dusk (i.e. crepuscular) (Bauer and Bauer 1981). It is recommended that these parameters are
recorded from this point forward and future datasets stratified by these parameters.
Indicator families are defined as families that use the reef primarily for recruitment, protection
and food, seldom straying from their respective territories. Although they are not commercially
important, their presence is indicative of a healthy reef (Hourigan et al., 1988). Indicator
families are identified down to species level for those that are most commonly seen on survey
sites. This covers; 4 species of angelfish, 18 species of butterfly fish, 2 species of barracuda, 4
species of emperor and 17 damsels. There are however “others” encountered of these families
during surveying. “Others” made up 9.8% of all angelfish recorded, 22.2% of butterfly fish and
42.2% of damsel fish. Due to these high recording rates of “others” it is not possible to
calculate an accurate index of species diversity. Ideally all fish would be identified to species
level however this is not realistic during the time span RA’s typically stay on the project.
22
FJM 152
4.
Julia Baker
Proposed work programme next phase
Camp and logistics:
- Fiber glass repairs of other 2 boats
- Dog gate
Community:
- Continue to visit Rakua Kinder
- Support logistics for SPCA event
- Teach one-off presentations as Yancua Primary school
Scientific:
- Look into new survey sites
- Survey all transects for benthic cover to compare with 2013 data
- Survey all sites for invertebrates
- Start to test for some of the factors which may be contributing to abundance and
diversity of benthic cover and fish – water quality
- Baseline benthic species cover at shark feeding site
- Presentations on wider contributions of FJM’s work and habitat connectivity including
impacts of climate change to vulnerable ecosystems such as mangroves.
- Move towards surveying commercially targeted fish to species level
- Work on lit reviews to inform science report
- Standardise fish size estimations
- Develop methodologies for coral nursery
- Develop methodologies for COT removal
- Map Vaqa Bay for habitat cover and evidence of anthropogenic influence
23
FJM 152
Julia Baker
5. References
Burns, G. L. "Amidst our people': Impact of tourism and local knowledge in Beqa." Science of
Pacific Island People (1994): 25-40.
Baird, A. H., and T. P. Hughes. "Competitive dominance by tabular corals: an experimental
analysis of recruitment and survival of understorey assemblages." Journal of Experimental
Marine Biology and Ecology 251.1 (2000): 117-132.
Carpenter, K. E. and Allen, G. R. (1989) FAO Species Catalogue, Emperor fishes and large-eye
breams of the world (family Lethrinidae). An annotated and illustrated catalogue of lethrinid
species known to date. FAO Fisheries Synopsis 125: 9, 1-118.
Coles, S. L., and P. L. Jokiel. "Synergistic effects of temperature, salinity and light on the
hermatypic coral Montipora verrucosa." Marine Biology 49.3 (1978): 187-195.
Connell, J. H., Hughes, T. E & Wallace, C. C. (1997). A 30-year study of coral abundance,
recruitment, and disturbance at several scales in space and time. Ecol Monogr. 67: 461-488.
Christine, A.O. The physiological ecology and behaviour of an apex marine predatory fish, the
great barracuda (Sphyraena barracuda). (2010). Dissertation. Carleton University Ottawa.
Cumming, R. L., Aalbersberg, W. G. L., Lovell, E. R., Sykes, H. & Vuki, V. C. (2002).
Institute of Applied Sciences, The University of the South Pacific. IAS technical report
2002/11. 1-16.
Done, T. J., Ogden, J. C., Wiebe, W. J & Rosen B, R. (1996). Biodiversity and ecosystem
function of coral reefs. In: Mooney, H. A, Cushman, J. H & Medina E. Sala, O. E. Schulze
ED (eds). Functional roles of biodiversity: a global perspective. John LViley & Sons, New
York. 394-427.
Fabricius, E. (2005). Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs:
review and synthesis. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50, 125–146
FAO (2007). The world’s mangroves 1980–2005. FAO Forestry Paper 153. FAO, Rome
Giri, C., Ochieng. E., Tieszen L.L.,Zhu Z., Singh, A., Loveland, T. Masek, J. and. Duke, N.
(2010). Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using earth
observation satellite data. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 20, 154-159.
Grubich, Justin R., Aaron N. Rice, and Mark W. Westneat. "Functional morphology of bite
mechanics in the great barracuda (Sphyraena barracuda)." Zoology 111.1 (2008): 16-29.
Hodgson, G. (2001). Reef Check; The first step in community-based management. Bulletin of
Marine Science. 69: 861-868.
Hoffmann, T. C. (2002). Coral reef health and effects of socio-economic factors in Fiji and
Cook Islands. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 44: 1281–1293.
24
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Hourigan, Thomas F., C. Tricas Timothy, and Ernst S. Reese. "Coral reef fishes as indicators of
environmental stress in coral reefs." Marine organisms as indicators. Springer New York, 1988.
107-135.
Hutchings, P., Kingsford, M & Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 2008. The Great Barrier Reef; Biology,
Environment and Management. CSIRO Publishing. 298.
Kilar, J. A & McLachlan, J. (1989). Effects of wave exposure on the community structure of
a plantdominated, fringing-reef platform: intermediate disturbance and disturbance mediated
competition. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 54: 265-276.
Lovell, E. R. (2001). Status report: collection of coral and other benthic reef organisms for
the marine aquarium trade and curio trade in Fiji. Report for the WWF South Pacific
Programme, Suva, Fiji.
Lovell, E., Sykes, H., Deiye, M., Wantiez, L., Garrigue, C., Virly, S., Samuelu, J., Solofa, A.,
Poulasi, T., Pakoa, K., Sabetian, A., Afzal, D., Hughes, A & Sulu, R. (2004). 12. Status of
Coral Reefs in the South West Pacific: Fiji, Nauru, New Caladonia, Samoa, Solomon Islands,
Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2004. 337 – 362.
Mosley, L. M., Aalbersberg, W. G. L. (2002). Nutrient levels in sea and river water along
the "Coral Coast" of Viti Levu, Fiji. South Pacific Journal of Natural Sciences. 7.
MRIS (Marine Resource Inventory Survey) - Team Resource Survey at Beqa Lagoon for
Yannuca and Rakua Villages and Commissioner Central – Fisheries dept, Lami. Sept 2012.
Olivotto, Ike, et al. "Spawning, early development, and first feeding in the lemonpeel
angelfish Centropyge flavissimus." Aquaculture 253.1 (2006): 270-278.
Pratchett, M.S. (2005) Dietary overlap among coral-feeding butterflyfishes
(Chaetodontidae) at Lizard Island, northern Great Barrier Reef. Marine Biology, 148:373382.
Rajeswari, Mayavan Veeramuthu, and Thangavel Balasubramanian. "Distribution, diversity and
taxonomy of marine angelfishes (Pomacanthidae) of Tamilnadu, Southeast coast of
India." International Journal 6.2 (2014): 20-31.
Reaka-Kudla, M.L. (1996). The global biodversity of coral reefs: a comparison with rain
forests. In: Reaka-Kudld ML, Wil- son DE, Wilson E0 (eds) Biodiversity 11. Joseph Henry
Press, Washington. 83-108.
Solomon, S., Plattner, G. K., Knutti, R., & Friedlingstein, P. (2009). Irreversible climate change
due to carbon dioxide emissions. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 106(6),
1704-1709.
Tamata, B & Thaman, B. (2001). Water quality in the ports of Fiji – survey of various ports and
industrial point sources of pollution. IAS Environment Studies Report C103, Institute of Applied
Sciences, The University of the South Pacific.
Teh L.C.I, Tech L.S.L, Starkhuse B, Sumalla R (2008). An overview of the socio-economic and
ecological perspectives of Fiji’s inshore reef fisheries. Marine Policy (33), 807-817.
25
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Veitayaki, J., Morris, C., Bala, S., Manueli, F., Brown, K., Kumar, A & Pollard, E. (2012).
Baseline Coral Reef and Environment Impact Assessment of Naitauba Island. 67.
Veitayaki, J., 2006. Caring for the Environment and the Mitigation of Natural Extreme Events
in Vanuaso Tikina, Gau Island, Fiji Islands: A Self-help Community Initiative. Island Studies
Journal, Vol. 1, No. 2
Zann, L. P., Brodie, J. E & Vuki, V. C. (1990). History and dynamics of the crown-of-thorns
starfish Acanthaster planci (L.) in the Suva area, Fiji. Coral Reefs. 9: 135-144.
Zann L. P & Lovell, E. R. (1992). The coral reefs of the Mamanuca group, Fiji: preliminary
descriptions and recommendations for management. National Environmental Management
Project. Report on the Marine Environment. Annex 3.
26
FJM 152
Julia Baker
6. Appendices
Appendix 1: List of indicator fish species surveyed.
ANGELFISH
Bicolour
Lemonpeel
Regal
Semicircle
Centropyge bicolor
Centropyge flavissimus
Pygoplites diacanthus
Pomacanthas semicirculatus
BARRACUDA
Great
Yellowtail
Sphyraena barracuda
Sphyraena flavicauda
BUTTERFLYFISH
Blackbacked
Dotted
Eastern triangle
Humphead
Latticed
Lined
Longnosed
Longfin bannerfish
Masked bannerfish
Pacific double saddle
Penant bannerfish
Racoon
Redfin
Saddleback
Saddled
Speckled
Teardrop
Vagabond
Chaetodon melannotus
Chaetodon semeion
Chaetodon baronessa
Heniochus varius
Chaetodon rafflesi
Chaetodon lineolatus
Forcipiger flavissimus
Heniochus acuminatus
Heniochus monoceros
Chaetodon ulietensis
Heniochus chrysostomus
Chaetodon lunula
Chaetodon trifasciatus
Chaetodon falcula
Chaetodon ephippium
Chaetodon citrinellus
Chaetodon unimaculatus
Chaetodon vagabundus
DAMSELFISH
Bicolor chromis
Black axil chromis
Blue devil
Humbug dascylus
Indopacific sergeant
Jewel
Pink anemonefish
Dusky anemonefish
Scissortail sergeant
Staghorn
Threespot dascylus
Chromis margaritifer
Chromis atripectoralis
Chrysiptera cyanea
Dascyllus aruanus
Abudefduf vaigiensis
Plectroglyphidodon lacrymatus
Amphiprion perideraion
Amphiprion melanopus
Abudefduf sexfasciatus
Amblyglyphidodon curacao
Dascyllus trimaculatus
27
FJM 152
Whitebelly
Speckled
Black
Grey demoiselle
Reticulated dascylus
Golden damsel
Julia Baker
Amblyglyphidodon leucogaster
Pomacentrus bankanensis
Neoglyphidodon melas
Chrysiptera glauca
Dascyllus reticulatus
Amblyglyphidodon aureus
EMPEROR
Bigeye
Blackspot
Longface
Pink ear
Monotaxis grandoculis
Lethrinus harak
Lethrinus olivaceus
Lethrinus lentjan
OTHER FAMILIES
Other Damselfish
Surgeonfish
Bristletooth
Tang
Unicornfish
Wrasse
Goatfish
Cardinalfish
Parrotfish
Triggerfish
Grouper
Other Butterflyfish
Blenny
Snapper
Squirrelfish
Coral Bream
Rabbitfish
Goby
Ray
Pufferfish
Porcupinefish
Trumpetfish
Fusilier
Jack
Other Angelfish
Moorish Idol
File Fish
Spadefish
Sweetlips
Shark
Pomacentrus/Chrysiptera/Chromis/Stegastes spp.
Acanthurus spp.
Ctenochaetus spp.
Zebrasoma spp.
Naso spp.
Bodianus/Labroides/ Cheilinus spp.
Mulloidichthys/ Parupeneus spp.
Cheilodipterus spp.
Chlorurus/Scarus spp.
Sufflamen spp.
Epinephelus spp.
Chaetodon spp.
Exyrias spp.
Lutjanus/Macolor spp.
Neoniphon/Sargocentron spp.
Scolopsis spp.
Siganus spp.
Amblyeleotris spp.
Taeniura spp.
Canthigaster
Diodon spp.
Aulostomus spp.
Caesio spp.
Caranx spp.
Centropyge/Pomacanthus spp.
Zanclus cornutus
Oxymonacanthus
Platax spp.
Plectorhinchus
Carcharhinus/Triaenodon spp.
28
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Appendix 2: Stacked bar charts to show indicator fish species recordings at each site
over the survey period.
Angel
Average sighting per transect
A
5
4
3
2
1
0
Rabbit
Mala's
Vuvalai
Bikini
Wreck
Lunch
Site
Bicolour Angelfish
Lemonpeel Angelfish
Semicircle Angelfish
Other Anglefish
Regal Angelfish
Average Sightings per Trasect
Butterfly
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
B
Rabbit
Mala's
Vuvalai
Bikini
Wreck
Site
Other Butterfly
Blackbacked Butterflyfish
Dotted Butterflyfish
Eastern Triangle
Humphead Bannerfish
Latticed Butterflyfish
Lined Butterflyfish
Longnosed Butterflyfish
Longfin Bannerfish
Masked Bannerfish
Pacific Doublesaddled Butterflyfish Penant Bannerfish
Racoon Butterflyfish
Redfin Butterflyfish
Saddleback Butterflyfish
Saddled Butterflyfish
Speckled Butterflyfish
Teardrop Butterflyfish
Vagabond Butterflyfish
29
Lunch
FJM 152
Julia Baker
C
Barracuda
Average Sighting per Transect
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Rabbit
Mala's
Vuvalai
Bikini
Wreck
Lunch
Site
Great Barracuda
D
Yellowtail Barracuda
Emperors
Average Sighting per Transect
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Rabbit
Mala's
Vuvalai
Bikini
Wreck
Lunch
Site
Bigeye Emperor
Blackspot Emperor
30
Longface Emperor
Pinkear Emperor
FJM 152
Julia Baker
E
Damsel
Average Sighting per Transect
250
200
150
100
50
0
Rabbit
Mala's
Vuvalai
Bikini
Wreck
Site
Other Damsel
Bicolor Chromis
Black Axil Chromis
Blue Devil
Humbug Dascylus
Indopacific Sergeant
Jewel Damsel
Pink Anemonefish
Dusky Anemonefish
Scissortail Sergeant
Staghorn Damsel
Threespot Dascylus
Whitebelly Damsel
Speckled Damsel
Black Damsel
Grey Demoiselle
Reticulated Dascylus
Golden Damsel
Figure 11 (A-E): stacked column charts to show the species diversity of indicator species;
(A)Angel (B)Butterfly (C)Barracuda (D)Emperor and (E)Damsel.
31
Lunch
FJM 152
Julia Baker
Appendix 3: Stacked column chart to show “other families” recorded at each site.
Figure 12: A stacked column chart to show non-indicator family abundance at each site.
32