Evaluating the effectiveness of zoning at
Ningaloo Reef Marine Park
Russ Babcock
9 July 2012
CSIRO MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH / WEALTH FROM OCEANS FLAGSHIP
Ningaloo World Heritage Area
Muiron
Lighthouse
Bundegi
Mangrove
Mandu
Exmouth
Gulf
Osprey
Cloates
Legend
Conservation Area
Unclassified
Maud
Recreation
New Sanctuary
General Use
Special Purpose (BP)
Special Purpose (SBA)
Pelican
Old Sanctuary
0 5 10
Gnarloo
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
20
30
Kilometres
40
Rationale:
Are Sanctuary zones Adequate and Effective?
•
Measures of the zoning effectiveness: abundance and biomass of
key fish species in historic no-take zones
•
Baseline data: overall abundance and size across the Marine Park
•
Adequacy of sanctuaries: effect of reserve size and fish
movements
Adaptive management requires evidence in order to be effective
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Sampling design
Muiron
Lighthouse
Stratified by:
• Region (north central south)
• Habitat (lagoon, reef-flat, reef slope)
• Zoning
• 900+ transects
over 2 years
113°50'0"E
113°55'0"E
114°0'0"E
Bundegi
Mangrove
Mandu
Exmouth
Gulf
Osprey
114°5'0"E
21°55'0"S
21°55'0"S
Mangrove
22°0'0"S
22°0'0"S
Cloates
Legend
Legend
Old Sanctuary
Sites sampled - 2006
22°5'0"S
22°5'0"S
Pelagic
Mandu
Conservation Area
Deep water mixed filter feeding and soft bottom communities
Unclassified
Coral reef communities (subtidal)
Coral reef communities (intertidal or shallow/limestone)
Recreation
Subtidal reef (low relief - seaward)
Maud
Subtidal reef (low relief - lagoonal)
Sanctuary
Macroalgae (limestone reef)
General Use
Sand
Shoreline reef
22°10'0"S
22°10'0"S
Special Purpose (BP)
Mudflat
Mangal
Special Purpose (SBA)
Salt marsh
Recreation
Pelican
New Sanctuary
General Use
Special Purpose (BP)
22°15'0"S
Special Purpose (SBA)
Osprey
0
113°50'0"E
1
22°15'0"S
Old Sanctuary
2
4
6
113°55'0"E
Kilometres
8
114°0'0"E
114°5'0"E
Cape
Farquhar
0 5 10
Gnarloo
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
20
30
Kilometres
40
Effectiveness:
Biomass of key fish species in Sanctuary zones
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Zoning effects
•Spangled Emperor Lethrinus nebulosus
•Generalised predator/invertivore
•Important fishing target species
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Zoning effects
• Roughly 50% higher Spangled Emperor biomass in
old sanctuary zones (p=0.014)
Lethrinus nebulosus
10000
IN
9000
OUT
8000
Biomass (g)
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Lagoon
Reefflat
Most of the difference found in the lagoon habitats
(p= 0.0003)
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Reefslope
Twenty years at Osprey Sanctuary: 1987-2006
113°50'0"E
14
12
1987
2006
10
Fish per transect
Osprey
Legend
Lethrinus nebulosus
Number per 0.1 ha
0
1-5
6 - 10
11 - 50
51 - 450
8
6
4
Old Sanctuary
Recreation
Sanctuary
General Use
Special Purpose (BP)
22°15'0"S
0
0.5
1
Kilometres
2
113°50'0"E
Special Purpose (SBA)
22°15'0"S
2
0
unfished
•half as many Lethrinus nebulosus inside the old sanctuary zone
•greater difference outside the sanctuary
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
fished
Relating fish abundance to human usage
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Relating fish abundance to human usage
Grey Reef Shark
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Recreational fishing
Fishing pressure and target species biomass
C amblyrhynchos
L nebulosus
Spangled
Emperor
Grey Reef Shark
25000
a
a b
14000
b
a
b
b
12000
20000
Biomass
Biomass
10000
15000
10000
8000
6000
4000
5000
2000
0
0
0.5
50
>200
0.5
50
Boats
Boats
Serranids
Serranids
a
b
trevallies
Carangids
b
30000
5000
25000
4000
20000
Biomass
Biomass
6000
>200
3000
2000
1000
a
b
c
15000
10000
5000
0
0
0.5
50
Boats
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
>200
0.5
50
Boats
>200
Adequacy of sanctuaries:
fish behaviour and habitat use
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Acoustic Tagging and Tracking
Inserting an acoustic tag into a spangled emperor – less than 4 minutes
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Population spatial usage and individual 50% Home Ranges
30
Sanctuary
25
15
10
5
0
Samples
1
0
20
40
8157
8165
8078
8090
8163
8041
8140
8050
8108
8153
8095
8036
8053
8045
8030
8046
8031
8055
8160
8052
8033
8034
8025
8038
8062
8043
8168
8054
8105
8026
8158
8072
8075
8028
8120
8048
8047
8051
8171
8162
8024
8103
8122
8044
8169
Distance
60
%
20
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
2
3
4
5
6
>6
Kernel Area (km2)
• Results based on 63 individuals
• 45 (71%) stayed in the array for
long enough to calculate centre of
activity
• others left after shorter periods of
time (29%)
• multiple behavioural modes?
Zoning adequacy and fish movement
Spangled Emperor
• Some fish stay in a sanctuary all the time, many fish range
more widely, moving across boundaries
• Details of the scale of fish habitat use and habitat
preferences can now be used to aid the design of
sanctuary zones within multiple use marine parks
• Populations are connected and this needs to be
considered as part of the trade-offs between on-reserve
and off-reserve management
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Integrating conservation and fisheries
perspectives at Ningaloo
• Overall changes are
likely needed to
maintain Spangled
Emperor populations
in the park, even with
current re-zoning
ELF population model 1544 1 minute grid cells
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Summary: effects on fish species
Are Ningaloo’s Sanctuary zones effective?
• Evidence for Sanctuary Zones having positive effect on
some target species
• Need to re-evaluate desirability of shoreline fishing
access zones
• Stronger effects of fishing across the park in general;
sanctuary zone scheme may not be sufficient on its own
The Future
• Broad Baselines for measurement of future trends and
responses in sanctuary zones and in the park overall
• Collaborative ongoing monitoring and research for new
information in future conservation initiatives
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Acknowledgements
•
•
•
•
•
•
WA Dept of Environment and Conservation
WA Dept of Fisheries
WAMSI – WA Marine Science Institution
Tony Ayling
Bill de la Mare and CSIRO WfO Flagship
Charlie Huveneers & Andrew Boomer, IMOS AATAMS Facility
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Thank you
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric
Research
Russ Babcock
Presenter Title
t +61 7 9333 5904
e Russ.Babcock@csiro.au
w www.csiro.au/lorem
CSIRO MARINE AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH FROM OCEANS FLAGSHIP
Comprehensiveness and Representativeness:
Ningaloo fish assemblages
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Regional trends in fish assemblage structure
Reef slopes
Transform: Fourth root
Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity
Muiron
Muiron
Lighthouse
Bundegi
Bundegi
Mangrove
Lighthouse
Mandu
Exmouth
Gulf
Osprey
Mandu
Osprey
Cloates
Cloates
Maud
Legend
Conservation Area
Unclassified
Maud
Pelican
Recreation
New Sanctuary
General Use
Special Purpose (BP)
Special Purpose (SBA)
Pelican
Farquhar
Old Sanctuary
Gnarloo
0 5 10
Gnarloo
20
40
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
60
Similarity
80
100
20
30
Kilometres
40
Zoning effects
• Yellowtailed Emperor biomass 100% greater in
old sanctuary zones (p=0.014)
Lethrinus atkinsoni
5000
4500
4000
IN
OUT
Biomass (g)
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Lagoon
• Across all habitats
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Reefflat
Reefslope
Model system: Ningaloo Marine Park
Muiron
Complex zoning,
habitats represented unevenly
Lighthouse
Bundegi
Mangrove
•Is zoning adequate?
Mandu
Exmouth
Gulf
Osprey
Cloates
Legend
Conservation Area
Unclassified
Maud
Recreation
New Sanctuary
General Use
Special Purpose (BP)
Special Purpose (SBA)
Pelican
Old Sanctuary
e.g. MPA that allows shoreline fishing and
Does not include reef slope habitat
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
0 5 10
Gnarloo
20
30
Kilometres
40
Movement of
spangled emperor
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment
Marine Park zoning and target species
Zoning is working, but…..
• working differently for different species,
• doesn’t seem to have stopped a general decline in target
species
No silver bullet - effective management of the whole park
may need to consider more active management outside
no-take areas
Ongoing information required at both sanctuary and wholeof-park level
Babcock et al. Ningaloo Assessment