1
Monitoring and surveillance of environmental indicators in
Tsitsikamma National Park
Contributors:
Mr N. Cole (Alien Species Unit)
Mr. L. Du Plessis (Scientific Management Services)
Dr. N. Hanekom (Marine Biologist: Scientific Services)
Ms. T. Kraaij (Terrestrial Ecologist: Scientific Services)
Mr M. Malepe (Park Manager: Tsitsikamma National Park)
Dr. R. Randall (Manager: Scientific Services: Rondevlei)
Mr. A. Riley (Senior Ranger: Tsitsikamma National Park)
Dr. I. Russell (Aquatic Ecologist: Scientific Services)
Mr. W. Vermeulen (Scientific Management Services)
Last Updated: March 2009
2
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3
2. MONITORING AND THRESHOLDS OF POTENTIAL CONCERNS ...................................................... 6
2.1 OBJECTIVE - FUNCTIONAL ECOSYSTEMS ........................................................................................ 6
2.1.1 SUB-OBJECTIVE - ESTUARY MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 6
2.1.1.1 PROGRAMME - RECRUITMENT OF MARINE BIOTA ................................................... 6
2.1.2. SUB-OBJECTIVE - MARINE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................ 7
2.1.2.1. PROGRAMME - INTERTIDAL MUSSEL BEDS ............................................................ 7
2.1.2.2 PROGRAMME - INTERTIDAL BAIT STOCKS ............................................................... 9
2.1.2.3 PROGRAMME - INSHORE FISH STOCKS (Monitoring done by SAIAB) ....................... 10
2.1.2.4 PROGRAMME - NEARSHORE FISH STOCKS (Monitoring done by SAEON) ............... 13
2.1.3. SUB-OBJECTIVE – FIRE MANAGEMENT ...............................................................................15
2.1.3.1 PROGRAMME – FIRE REGIME ................................................................................. 15
2.1.4 SUB-OBJECTIVE - INDIGENOUS FORESTS ...........................................................................16
2.1.4.1 PROGRAMME - INDIGENOUS FORESTS .................................................................. 16
2.1.5 SUB-OBJECTIVE - THREATENED BIOTA................................................................................17
2.1.5.1 PROGRAMME - PLANTS .......................................................................................... 17
2.1.5.2 PROGRAMME - BLUE DUIKER ................................................................................. 18
2.2. OBJECTIVE –REHABILITATION ......................................................................................................... 20
2.2.2. SUB-OBJECTIVE - ALIEN PLANTS AND OTHER ALIEN BIOTA ............................................20
2.2.2.1 PROGRAMME – ALIEN PLANTS ............................................................................... 20
2.3 OBJECTIVE- RECONCILING BIODIVERSITY WITH OTHER PARK OBJECTIVES ........................... 21
2.3.1 SUB-OBJECTIVE - INTERNAL ACTIVITIES .............................................................................21
2.3.1.1 PROGRAMME – EFFLUENT OUTLET ....................................................................... 21
2.3.2 SUB-OBJECTIVE - EXTRACTIVE RESOURCE USE ...............................................................22
2.3.2.1 PROGRAMME – MARINE FISH UTILIZATION ............................................................ 22
2.3.2.2 PROGRAMME – MARINE INVERTEBRATE UTILIZATION .......................................... 23
2.4 OBJECTIVE- RECONCILING BIODIVERSITY WITH EXTERNAL THREATS ..................................... 24
2.4.1.1. PROGRAMME - POLLUTION OF STREAMS BY GOLF ESTATE ................................ 24
2.4.2.1 PROGRAMME – WATER QUALITY OF GROOT ESTUARY ........................................ 25
3. DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING ............................................................................................... 26
4. SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMME ........................................................................................................... 27
5. FUTURE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................... 27
6. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 28
3
1. Introduction
Protected areas are often established for a number of purposes, such as the protection of
habitats, biodiversity and species, restoration of populations stocks and minimization of conflict
among diverse resource users. To manage for such spatial and temporal heterogeneity generally
requires the use of a management policy that is goal orientated and adaptive in approach
(Pomeroy et al. 2004). Such an adaptive management system integrates design management and
monitoring to systematically test assumptions, so as to learn and adapt (Salafsky et al. 2001 in
Pomeroy et al. 2004). Although there are several different adaptive management models, they
generally follow the same basic procedure of setting a desired future state, defining objectives and
goals, planning and implementation of management actions, monitoring of indicators so as to
audit goal achievement and enable informed evaluation of the management process. The
strategic adaptive management model adapted by SANParks (Biggs & Rogers 2003), has a
strong emphasis on planning and setting up of an effective monitoring programme (Rogers &
Bestbier 1997), which enables one to test hypotheses for change from a set of limits. The concept
of pre-defined limits or thresholds has long been applied in some aspects of monitoring, such as
water quality standards for human use. However, determination of scientifically rigorous limits of
changes for the management of broader ecosystem heterogeneity has proved more difficult. In
the adaptive management model used by SANParks these pre-defined limits are termed
Thresholds of Potential Concern (or TPC’s). They are in essence hypotheses of upper and/or
lower levels of acceptable ecosystem change (Rogers 2003), and as such are always open to
debate and refinement.
The selection of indicators should align with the management objectives and meet five criteria
(Margolius & Salafsky 1998 in Pomeroy et al. 2004), namely:
Measurable:
Precise:
Consistent:
Sensitive:
Simple:
Able to be recorded and analysed in quantitative or qualitative terms.
Defined the same way by all people.
Not changing over time so that it always measures the same thing even
over a wide range of stress.
Change in direct response to the mechanism, driver, pattern or process of
interest and sensitive enough to provide early warning of change.
Easy and cost effective to measure. Simple indicators are generally
preferred to complex (composite ones).
Practical limitations, such as finite financial and human recourses, limit the number of indicators
that can be selected, and the proposed ‘monitoring’ programmes at Tsitsikamma National Park do
not address all the objectives outlined in the management plan for the park (Table 1). The
description of each monitoring programme and its proposed thresholds of potential concern, are
aligned with the relevant sub-objective of the management plan.
Table 1 Conservation objectives and sub-objectives for the Tsitsikamma National Park as given in the
park management plan, with ‘monitoring’ programme that can test the achievement of objectives.
Objective
Representative ecosystems:
To incorporate a spectrum of
viable terrestrial, aquatic, and
marine ecosystems characteristic
of the Tsitsikamma region, and to
re-introduce missing elements
where possible.
Sub-objective
Programme
Consolidation and expansion of
land/ sea areas:
Consolidation of protected areas
focusing on under representative
ecosystems, functional linkages and
processes.
Nil
Reintroduction of biota:
Reestablishment where possible, of
locally extinct or depleted
biodiversity components and
populations in accordance with
IUCN principles and guidelines.
Nil
4
Objective
Sub-objective
Estuary Management:
Manipulate appropriate biophysical
aspects of estuarine environment to
achieve social and ecosystem
conservation objectives.
Programme

Recruitment of marine
biota into Groot Estuary

Functional ecosystems:
To ensure the long term
persistence of biodiversity
patterns and processes, enabling
natural variation in structure,
function and composition over
space and time.
Marine Management: Strive to
maintain long term persistence of
biodiversity patterns and processes
in marine ecosystems, particularly
the protection of fish stocks

Fire management:
Apply appropriate fire regime in
fynbos areas (frequency, season,
intensity, size).

Fire management
Indigenous Forests:
Maintain forest intactness and
natural ecological processes.

Forest management
Threatened biota:
Maintain viable populations of
threatened species.


Plants
Blue duiker
Wetlands: Re-establishment of
physical, chemical and biological
processes in degraded wetland
areas.
Rehabilitation:
Rehabilitate degraded areas,
including the re-establishment of
natural biodiversity patterns, and
the restoration of key processes
which support the long term
persistence of biodiversity.


Intertidal mussel
beds
Intertidal bait stocks
Inshore fish stocks–
SAIAB
Nearshore fish
stocks– SAEON
Alien plants and other alien
biota: Control and where possible
eliminate alien biota to facilitate reestablishment of natural biodiversity
pattern and process in invaded
areas.
Nil


Alien plant control
(Intertidal mussel beds
under Marine
management)
5
Objective
Reconciling biodiversity with
other park objectives:
To ensure that non-biodiversity
management aspects of
SANParks operations (revenue
generation including tourism,
resource use, developments,
management activities, etc.) are
informed and constrained by
biodiversity conservation
objectives, and that the impacts of
these activities on biodiversity are
minimised.
Sub-objective
Programme
Internal developments:
Minimise the impacts associated
with the development of tourism
and park management
infrastructure, and ensure that such
developments do not compromise
biodiversity objectives.
Nil
Internal activities:
Minimise the impacts associated
with tourism and park management
activities, and ensure that such
activities do not compromise
biodiversity objectives.
Extractive resource use:
Minimise the impacts of extractive
resource use, and ensure that such
activities are aligned with corporate
guidelines; are within management
capacity constraints, and do not
compromise biodiversity objectives.
External developments:
Minimise the impacts associated
with inappropriate developments
outside the park
Reconciling biodiversity with
external threats:
To reduce external threats and
pressures, and limit impacts of
surrounding land & resource use
on biodiversity conservation
within the park.
External activities:
Negotiate to ensure that external
resource and land use do not
detrimentally affect ecological
processes within the park.
Hydrological and water chemistry
changes:
Participate in activities for the
maintenance of river flow regimes
and water chemistry within limits for
the maintenance of ecosystem
processes in aquatic ecosystems
within the park.
Illegal harvesting of resources:
Prevent the illegal collection,
removal and destruction of physical
and biological resources.

Effluent outflow on
shoreline


Marine fish utilization
Marine invertebrate use
Nil

Pollution of streams by
golf estate

Water quality of Groot
estuary
6
2. MONITORING AND THRESHOLDS OF POTENTIAL CONCERNS
Indicators were grouped according the objectives and sub-objectives given in the Management Plan
2.1 OBJECTIVE - FUNCTIONAL ECOSYSTEMS
2.1.1 SUB-OBJECTIVE - ESTUARY MANAGEMENT:
2.1.1.1 PROGRAMME - RECRUITMENT OF MARINE BIOTA
Rationale
The Groot (West) Estuary, the only estuary in the park that is classed as a temporary closed
system (Whitfield 2000), is blocked off from the sea for varying lengths of time by a sand bar
which forms at the mouth (Morant & Bickerton 1983). This occurs during low river flows combined
with longshore sand movements in the nearshore marine environment (Day 1981). Several biota
occurring in the estuarine environments have an obligate marine phase in their life cycle. For most
fully aquatic species movement between the estuarine and marine environments can only be
achieved during periods when the estuary mouth is open (Whitfield 1989a, 1989b), or in the case
of some larval fishes, when there is substantial over-wash of the sandbar (Whitfield 1992). The
absence of an open mouth phase during various life-cycle stages could, in the short term, result in
reduced or failed recruitment and hence unrepresented or lost age cohorts, and in the long term,
loss of species.
Management objective
To manage the Groot (West) Estuary so that its mouth opens to the sea for sufficient time to allow
for suitable marine recruitment into the estuary.
Sampling methods
Procedure - Observations of whether estuary mouth is open or closed (either with or without
overtopping) will be regularly undertaken and the dates of breaching and closing recorded. If
required ‘continuous’ water level heights recorded near the Nature’s Valley Rest-camp by the
Department of Water Affairs & Forestry (DWAF) will be requested in order to verify the field data.
Spatial scale – Observations at mouth of Groot Estuary, water level at Nature’s Valley Rest-camp.
Temporal scale – Strive to undertake daily, but a minimum of weekly, observations of mouth state,
in addition to continuous recording (at c. 15 minutes interval) of water level heights by DWAF.
Threshold of potential concern (TPC’s)
 A threshold of potential concern is reached if Groot estuary fails to remain open continuously
for at least one complete lunar cycle (approximately 28 days) during the period 1 September
to 31 March for two consecutive years.
The threshold for duration of mouth closure was based on collective judgement, while that for
seasons was based on optimal recruitment period for the majority of abundant estuarine fishes
(Whitfield 1998).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle
 Ascertain whether the populations of key marine species in the estuary still have a reasonable
(>20%) juvenile component.
 Ascertain possible causes of reduced freshwater inflow into the estuary.
 Determine the desirability of artificially breaching the mouth of the estuary.
Project commencement
Commenced in the early 2000s - ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
7
Responsibilities:
 Data collection - Park Management (observation), Scientific Services (request water level data
from DWAF).
 Data interpretation - Park Management to provide observation data to Scientific Services, who
will undertake analyses and interpretation.
 Data maintenance - Scientific Services will maintain databases.
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.1.2. SUB-OBJECTIVE - MARINE MANAGEMENT
2.1.2.1. PROGRAMME - INTERTIDAL MUSSEL BEDS
Rationale
Historically three indigenous mussel species formed extensive beds on rocky intertidal and
shallow subtidal reefs of the South African coastline (Brown and Jarman 1978). A fourth mussel
species, the invasive Mediterranean mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis was accidentally introduced
on the west coast of South Africa between the late 1970s and early 1980s (Grant and Cherry
1985; Griffiths et al. 1992). It soon became an aggressive invader. By 1990 the Mediterranean
mussel comprised over 70% of intertidal mussel biomass on the west coast, compared to only 1%
on the warmer south and south-east coasts, where the brown mussel Perna perna was the
dominant mussel (Van Erkom Schurink and Griffiths 1990). The numbers of the Mediterranean
mussel on the south and south-east coasts (including the Tsitsikamma coastline) has continued to
increase, but its abundance is variable and site specific (McQuaid and Phillips 2000; Rius 2004;
Robinson et al. 2005; Hanekom 2008). At sites where the Mediterranean mussel is plentiful, it
dominates the high-shore and brown mussel the low-shore, with a mixed zone at the mid-tide
level (Bownes and McQuaid 2006).
Intertidal sites with large populations of mussels will be monitored, because:
 Mussels are dominant species, forming dense beds on the intertidal, rocky shores of southern
Africa (Van Erkom Schurink and Griffiths 1990).
 Mussel beds provide a habitat for numerous other smaller invertebrate species, and they
generally a have high species diversity of associated fauna (Suchanek 1985; Seed 1996;
Hammond and Griffiths 2004).
 The long-term affect of the Mediterranean mussel invasion of the indigenous brown mussel
population still needs to be determined.
Management objective
To maintain the species rich, indigenous mussel beds along the rocky intertidal shores of the
Tsitsikamma National Park.
Sampling methods
Procedure: The cover abundance value of mussels (all species) and that of the indigenous
brown mussel will be estimated within 50 x 50 cm quadrats, which are subdivided by cord into 100
5 x 5 cm squares. Duplicate assessments will be done at 5 transect points, which are 5 m apart
(or on more extensive shores 10 m apart) along the length of the mid zone of mussel beds at
three wave exposed localities in the Tsitsikamma MPA, and in future at one site in the exploited
De Vasselot Area.
Spatial scale: The rocky intertidal shore Swartrif, Jan Swart, Vergenoeg and, in the future, the
exploited Nature’s valley area.
Temporal scale: Counts will be done annually.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:

The mean cover abundance of mussels declines to less than 60 percent (the 95% confidence
limit, Fig. 1) for three consecutive years in the mid zone of the mussel beds monitored in the
Tsitsikamma MPA.
8

The mean cover abundance contribution of the indigenous brown mussel decreases to less
than 42 percent (the 95% confidence limit, Fig. 1) of the mussel population for three
consecutive years in the mid zone of the bed monitored in the Tsitsikamma MPA.
These threshold values are based on the lower limits of 95% confidence range determined from
cover abundance values recorded at the three sampling sites in the Tsitsikamma MPA during
2007/8, and they corresponded to the mean lower limits (68 % for mussel cover and 38% for
contribution) recorded at Swartrif between 2005 and 2008 using a smaller (0.1m²) sampling
quadrat.
Mussel cover
100.0
% cover
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Sw artrif
J-Sw arts
Vergenoeg
Mean
TPC
Mean
TPC
Site
Indigenous mussel cover
% contribution
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Sw artrif
J-Sw arts
Vergenoeg
Site
Figure 1. Percentage mussel cover and contribution by the indigenous mussel at three sites
studied (vertical lines represent 95% confidence range).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess appropriateness of methodology.
 Ascertain whether observed trends in mussel abundance correspond with that from other
areas in the southern Cape region.
 Investigate methods of protecting the indigenous brown mussel.
 Increase compliance activity in the area, should there be signs of mussel harvesting.
Project commencement
Related mussel project commenced 2005, current project 2007/8 - ongoing
Reporting frequency
Annual
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Scientific Services.
 Data interpretation – Scientific Services.
 Data maintenance – Scientific Services.
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
9
2.1.2.2 PROGRAMME - INTERTIDAL BAIT STOCKS
Rationale
The exposed rocky coastline of the Tsitsikamma National Park supports an abundance of benthic
invertebrate organism, including several organisms exploited by shore fishers for bait, such as
redbait, venus ear and mussels. Although the general ecology of many of these organisms have
been studied [e.g. red bait Pyura stolonifera (Berry 1982), venus ear Haliotis spadicea (Muller
1984), alikreukel Turbo sarmaticus (McLachlan & Lombard 1980, 1981; Yssel 1989), and brown
mussels Perna perna (Berry 1978)], the extent and impact of harvesting is poorly understood
(Griffith & Branch 1997; Anon. 1999; Mackenzie 2005). Extractive resource use is the biggest
threat to biodiversity along the South African coast (Lombard et al. 2005), and a key function of
the Tsitsikamma MPA is to provide a safe refuge for species threatened by exploitation. The
abundance of targeted bait organisms, as well as of less sought after sea urchins, which often
flourish in the absence of predators and/or inter-specific competitors, may provide an indication of
the level of bait harvesting occurring within the intertidal zone of the park.
Management objective
To protect, along the rocky intertidal shores of the Tsitsikamma National Park, the marine biota,
especially those species that are harvested by bait collectors and fishers in adjacent exploited
areas.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Assessments will be done at least three sampling sites within the Tsitsikamma MPA,
and in future at one site in the exploited De Vasselot Area. At each site five belt transects
(covering 1 m wide strip) spaced at 5m apart (or on more extensive shores 10 m apart) will be
done from the spring-low tide mark to the ‘high’ tide zone. On each transect the numbers of
individuals per key bait species will be counted and the size of each individual estimated to the
nearest centimetre using a tape measure.
Spatial scale: At three sites along the length of the MPA (Swartrif, Jan Swart and Vergenoeg),
and one site in the De Vasselot section of the coast, where angling and bait collecting is
permitted.
Temporal scale: Counts done annually.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern for the rocks between Jan Swart and Vergernoeg is reached if
one or more of the following conditions apply:



The mean abundance of redbait (P. stolonifera) declines to less than 1 individuals/metre
length of the shoreline (95% confidence level, Fig. 2) on three consecutive annual counts.
The mean abundance of venus ear (H. spadicea) declines to less than 0.1 /metre length of the
shoreline (95% confidence level, Fig. 2) on three consecutive annual counts.
The mean abundance of sea urchins (P. angulosus) recorded is more than 9 individuals/metre
length of the shoreline (95% confidence level, Fig. 2) on three consecutive annual counts.
The above preliminary threshold values are based on the limits of the 95% percent confidence
range determined from values recorded along 5 transects at 4 localities in the Elandbos –
Vergenoeg area of the Tsitsikamma MPA. Threshold limits will also be determined for the Swartrif
and exploited De Vasselot Area. These threholds will be modified and refined as more data
becomes available.
10
Redbait
8.0
Numbers
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Mean
Threshold
Mean
Threshold
Mean
Threshold
Site
Venus Ear
5.0
Numbers
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
-1.0
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site
Sea urchins
12.0
Numbers
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site
Figure 2. Mean numbers of three invertebrate ‘bait’ species at four sites in the ElandsbosVergenoeg area (vertical lines represent 95% confidence range).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess appropriateness of methodology.
 Investigate oceanographic anomalies and regional/national trends in bait organism densities.
 Increase compliance activity in the area to reduce poaching activity.
Project commencement
Commenced 2007/8 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Scientific Services.
 Data interpretation – Scientific Services.
 Data maintenance – Scientific Services.
 Reporting – Scientific Services.
11
2.1.2.3 PROGRAMME - INSHORE FISH STOCKS (Monitoring done by SAIAB)
Rationale
Most (c. 80 %) of the linefish species in the Tsitsikamma MPA are slow growing, long-lived
species (>20 years), and many have a high degree of residency (Buxton 1987; Cowley 2000;
Cowley et al. 2002; Brouwer et al. 2003; Kerwath et al. 2007), which makes them vulnerable to
over-exploitation. A point highlighted by the fact that the catch rates during research studies in
MPAs of the Garden Route are considerably higher than those recorded by fishers in nearby
exploited areas (Buxton & Smale 1989; Brouwer 2001; Brouwer & Buxton 2002; Cowley 2000;
Cowley et al. 2002; Götz 2005; Pradervand and Hiseman 2006). Furthermore, at Goukamma,
where recreational, shore-based fishing is still permitted, the recorded sizes (expressed as mean
annual weight) of blacktail Diplodus sargus capensis and galjoen Dichistius capensis caught
declined significantly (p<0.05) over a 10 year (1993 to 2002) study period (Pradervand and
Hiseman 2006). Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are considered to be one of the most effective
conservation strategies for fishes worldwide (Halpern 2003).
In the past legislated quotas, bag limits, size limits and closed seasons have often proved
ineffective to control fishing pressure (Bennett et al. 1994), and the stocks of approximately 14 fish
species, which are exploited by commercial or recreational fishers in South Africa, are regarded
as collapsed or in urgent need of protection due to fishing pressure (Mann 2000). Therefore, it is
essential to ascertain whether the Tsitsikamma MPA is providing effective protection of the fish
stocks. The greatest threat to the biodiversity in the park is illegal extractive resource use, and
monitoring will focus primarily on the abundance of key fisheries species, rather than community
structure (which is analytically more complex to analyse). The blacktail (Diplogus sargus capensis)
was selected as an indicator species, because it was the most abundant species caught (c. 25%
of total catch), it is generally restricted to shallow water (<25m) (Mann 1992), adult individuals are
fairly resident (Attwood & Bennett 1995) and it has a wide dietary range (Mann 1992), which
makes its susceptible to general deteriorations in invertebrate reef fauna.
Management objective
To protect, along the inshore areas of the Tsitsikamma National Park, those fish species that are
exploited by shore anglers along the South African coastline.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Scientific Services will request a summary of the annual catch of Dr Cowley of South
African Institute of Aquatic Biodiversity, who is undertaking a medium to long-term shore-based
capture and release fishing in a 5 km section of park. His angling team fishes during daylight,
using a variety of bait and hook sizes. The exact locality, bait used, time spent fishing, as well as
the numbers and lengths of all fish species caught are recorded. This programme depends on the
continued involvement of Dr Cowley and his team.
Spatial scale: Cowley’s study area is a 5 km stretch of coastline between the Bloukrans River and
Klip River.
Temporal scale: Between 1997 and 2004 Cowley undertook field trips every alternate month,
thereafter biannually.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:



The annual annual catch per unit effort (cpue) is less than 89 fish/100 angling hours (< 95%
confidence limits, Fig. 3) for three consecutive years.
The annual cpue for blacktail is less than 21 individuals/100 hrs (< 95% confidence limits, Fig.
4) for three consecutive sampling years.
The mean fork length of blacktail is less than 273 mm (95% confidence limits, Fig. 5) for three
consecutive sampling years.
The above threshold values are based on the lower limits of 95% confidence range recorded for
the catch rates recorded between 1995/8 and 2004. In fisheries management a catch per unit
effort of less than 25% of that recorded in protected areas is usually indicatives that a stock has
collapsed (Griffiths et al. 1999). The proposed thresholds are more 80% of the overall mean
12
recorded values. Should Dr Cowley undertake multivariate (community) analyses of the fish
catches, a threshold will be set at:
 A significant (p<0.05), directional temporal change in the catch composition of the anglers, as
determined by multivariate analysis, towards one that exhibits signs of over-exploitation.
Numbers per 100 hrs
Total catch per unit effort
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
To
ta
l
TP
C
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
0
Year
Figure 3. Annual total catch per unit effort (the vertical line represent 95% confidence range)
based on data provided by Cowley in lit. 2009.
Blacktail catch per unit effort
Numbers per 100 hrs
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Mean
TPC
Year
Figure 4. Annual catch per unit effort for blacktail (the vertical line represent 95% confidence
range) based on data of Götz et al. (2008).
Blacktail length
285
Length (mm)
280
275
270
265
260
255
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Mean
TPC
Year
Figure 5. Mean fork length of blacktail caught each year (the vertical line represent 95%
confidence range) based on data of Götz et al. (2008).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle
 Investigate oceanographic anomalies and regional/national trends in fish catches.
 Investigation of fishing activity in the area.
 Increased law enforcement activity in the area to reduce poaching in the park.
 Negotiate with MCM and other NGOs (WWF) to decrease bag limits, increase legal size limits,
and for the most overexploited species to close the fishery in open areas.
13
Project commencement
Commenced 1995 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Scientific Services will request relevant parts of the data collected by SAIAB.
 Data interpretation – Scientific Services (with assistance from SAIAB, where necessary).
 Data maintenance – Scientific Services (maintain core data relevant to TPC).
 Reporting - Scientific Services (core data relevant to TPC).
2.1.2.4 PROGRAMME - NEARSHORE FISH STOCKS (Monitoring done by SAEON)
Rationale
Fish communities of the nearshore reefs differ from those of the inshore (surf zone) of the
Tsitsikamma Marine Protected Area (MPA) and they include several endemic reef fish species
(Buxton & Smale 1984; Burger 1990), whose stocks are regarded as collapsed or in urgent need
of protection due to fishing pressure (Mann 2000). In the past legislated quotas, bag limits, size
limits and closed seasons have frequently proved ineffective to control fishing pressure (Bennett
et al. 1994), and it is essential to ascertain whether Tsitsikamma MPA is providing effective
protection for these fishes.
Multivariate analysis is able to detect differences between exploited fish communities outside the
Tsitsikamma MPA and protected ones inside the MPA (Bennett 2007), and this analysis has the
potential to determine community changes inside the MPA. However these results would provide
little insight into the status of the communities, and indicator species may be used for this purpose
(Bennett 2007).
Roman (Chrysoblephus laticeps) was selected as the main indicator species, because it is a reef
fish, with a small home range, and it feeds on wide variety invertebrate prey items (Buxton 1987;
Cowley et al. 2002; Kerwath et al. 2007). It is also one of the dominant reef species caught in the
controlled fishing experiments in both the Tsitsikamma MPA and an adjacent exploited areas, with
significantly higher catch rates and mean lengths being recorded in the MPA (Smith 2005; Bennett
2007).
Management Objective
To protect, in the near-shore areas of the Tsitsikamma National Park, those fish species that are
exploited by recreational and/or commercial anglers along the South African coastline.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Scientific Services will annually request data from the South African Environmental
Observation Network (SAEON), which undertakes nearshore fish research in the park. They use
both underwater visual counts and controlled fishing.
(a) Underwater Visual Counts: Historical baseline data for the abundance of roman on the nearshore reefs of the park were obtained from Buxton and Smale (1989), Burger (1990) and Bennett
(2007), who did underwater transect counts. Since 2007 SAEON have, and will continue to
undertake biannual transect counts. Two 50m transects per site will be conducted simultaneously
by two divers, and the number of individuals per fish species is recorded.
(b) Controlled fishing: Once-off controlled fishing experiments have been undertaken by Smith
(2005) and Bennett (2007) using two and four anglers respectively, as well as standardized hookline configuration. Since 2007 SAEON have, and will continue to undertake biannual fishing
excursions, using four anglers and standardized hook-line configuration.
Spatial scale: Subtidal reefs between Storms River and Rheeder se Knol.
Temporal scale: Irregular counts and fishing done prior to 2007, thereafter biannual counts were
implemented by SAEON.
14
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:



A more than 10% (or ca. 0.2 roman/100 m²) decline in the mean number of roman recorded
on transect counts over two consecutive years, or a mean density of less than 1.8 roman/100
m² over two consecutive years.
A more than 10% (or ca. 0.4 roman/angler hour) decline in the mean cpue of roman over two
consecutive years, or a mean cpue of less than 3.6 roman/angler hour over two consecutive
years.
A more than 10% (or ca. 31 mm) compound decline in the mean fork length of roman over two
consecutive years, or a mean fork length less than 274 mm over two consecutive years.
Similar types of thresholds may in future be determined for fransmadam (Boopsoidea inornata).
This species has a similar diet to that of roman, and it appears to be in competition with roman,
with its numbers being negatively influenced by that of roman (Götz 2005; Bennett 2007).
The pre-defined limits for:
(a) Catch per unit effort values for roman were based on controlled fishing of Smith (2005) and
Bennett (2007), (i.e. 4.6 and 4.2 roman per angler hour respectively),
(b) Mean fork lengths of the roman on values recorded by Smith (2005) and Bennett (2007) in
Tsitsikamma MPA and Gotz (2005) in Goukamma MPA (313, 331 and 302 mm respectively),
(c) Observed abundance on the underwater transect counts of Buxton and Smale (1989), Burger
(1990) and Bennett (2007) (densities of 2.3, 2.1 and 2.3 roman/100 m² respectively).
Should SAEON undertake multivariate (community) analyses of underwater visual counts and
fishing experiments, a threshold will be set at:
 A significant (p<0.05), directional temporal change in the community composition, as
determined by multivariate analysis, towards one that exhibits signs of over-exploitation.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Investigate oceanographic anomalies and regional / national trends in fish catches.
 Investigation of fishing activity in the area.
 Increased law enforcement activity in the area to reduce poaching in the park.
 Negotiate with MCM and other NGOs (WWF) to decrease bag limits, increase legal size limits,
and for the most overexploited species to close the fishery in open areas.
Project commencement
Commenced: Irregular counts between 1981 and 2005, biannual counts from 2008 and ongoing
Reporting frequency
Annual
Responsibilities
 Data collection–Scientific Services will request relevant parts of the data collected by SAEON.
 Data interpretation – Scientific Services (with assistance from SAEON, where necessary).
 Data maintenance – Scientific Services (maintain core data relevant to TPC).
 Reporting - Scientific Services (core data relevant to TPC).
15
2.1.3. SUB-OBJECTIVE – FIRE MANAGEMENT
2.1.3.1 PROGRAMME – FIRE REGIME
Rationale
The vegetation of the park largely comprises two vegetation types Tsitsikamma Sandstone
Fynbos and Southern Afrotemperate Forest (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). The fynbos component
occurs primarily in the mountainous Soetkraal area, and to a much smaller extent on the coastal
plateau and escarpment. Fire is the most important disturbance agent in fynbos vegetation. Of
critical importance in the management of fynbos is fire frequency, fire season and fire intensity
(Van Wilgen et al. 1992; Bekker 1994).
The minimum fire frequency is ascertained by the time it takes for the vegetation to reach maturity
and species to complete their life cycle (Van Wilgen 1981). Fire season is determined by climatic
factors and it can have a marked effect on species response to fire, especially in terms of
regeneration patterns, and species composition of mature fynbos (Van Wilgen & Viviers 1985; Le
Maitre 1988; Van Wilgen et al. 1992). In addition to fire frequency and fire season, post-fire
regeneration and plant species composition after fire, could also be severely impacted by fire
intensity (Van Wilgen et al. 1992; Bekker 1994). For example, low intensity fires would benefit
sprouting species, and species with shallow seed banks, while others could benefit from high
intensity fires. The fire intensity would depend on the fuel load, the compactness and
arrangement of fuels, fuel moisture content and the rate at which they burn (Van Wilgen et al.
1992; Teie 2003), as influenced by climatic conditions. Although prescriptions in terms of the
appropriate fire frequency and season for the Tsitsikamma Sandstone Fynbos do exist (vide
Southwood & De Lange 1984; Seydack et al. 1986), these should be reviewed, taking account of
recent research findings indicating more variable recruitment conditions throughout the year and
different plant growth rates towards the eastern part of the Cape Floristic Region where climate is
less seasonal (Heelemann et al. 2007).
Management objective
To maintain a diverse natural fynbos community by maintaining the appropriate fire regime within
the Tsitsikamma National Park.
Sampling methods
Procedure: The date, extent and cause (based on GPS readings or 1:50 000 maps) of all fires in
the park will be documented after each fire and captured on a GIS database. The estimated age
of major fynbos communities will be updated annually and field studies of post-fire recruitment will
be done, if deemed necessary.
Spatial scale: Burnt areas throughout the park.
Temporal scale: Intermittently dependent on occurrence of fire.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:


More than 33 % of the total Tsitsikamma Sandstone Fynbos area on the steep coastal
escarpment of the park is burnt in any one year.
The fire frequency of fynbos on the:
(a) mountains and coastal plateau is either less than 10 years or more than 25 years, (except
for limited areas managed at an 8 year fire rotation to afford fire protection to adjacent
plantations).
(b) coastal escarpment is less than 15 years.
Any area is burnt three times in succession outside of the ecological fire season (Dec-Apr)
prescribed for the western part of the Cape Floristic Region.
Control fires are either excessively hot or very cool.

Failure of re-seeding Proteaceae to recruit after fire.


Pre-defined limits were based on collective judgement and guided by the work Southwood & De
Lange (1984), Van Wilgen & Viviers (1985), Seydack et al. (1986), Le Maitre (1988) and Van
16
Wilgen et al. (1992). However, this programme will be updated upon the production of ecological
guidelines and thresholds for fire management in the Garden Route area in association with the
regional vegetation map of Vlok & Euston-Brown (2008).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Determine the reasons why thresholds were exceeded.
 Establish more effective fire breaks, or implement management burn where applicable.
 Establish better fire management/protection program with adjacent land owners.
 Adjust fire plan if plant recruitment results show that some aspects of fire regime are
detrimental to recruitment of indicator species or species of special concern.
Project commencement
Commenced: Fire records have been kept since 1985, but accuracy of data prior to 2005 needs to
be verified.
Reporting frequency
 Annual.
Responsibilities

Data collection – Park management (date, extent and cause of fire), Scientific Services (the
rest).

Data interpretation –Scientific Services.

Data Maintenance – Scientific Services (continue to update records).

Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.1.4 SUB-OBJECTIVE - INDIGENOUS FORESTS
2.1.4.1 PROGRAMME - INDIGENOUS FORESTS
Rationale
The largest complex of Southern Afrotemperate Forest is found along the coastal strip between
Humansdorp and Mossel Bay. Most (>50%) of this forest complex is protected, with only about
300 ha in the southern Cape having been transformed for pine plantation (Mucina & Rutherford
2006). The Southern Afrotemperate Forest is not a fire-driven vegetation type (Moll, 1983; Van
Wilgen 1987), and is restricted to areas that are moist throughout the year. The forest complex at
De Vasselot is the largest in the park, and contains populations of three forest species (Strychnos
decussate, Hippobromus pauciflorus and Strelitzia alba) which have limited representation
elsewhere in the Southern Cape (Geldenhuys 1992, 1993).
Maintenance of a healthy forest ecotone is an important part of the management of indigenous
forests, especially in the case of small, isolated forest patches, which are bordered by fire prone
vegetation such as fynbos. Fire may play an important ecological function in the maintenance of
natural forest/fynbos ecotones, which supports both forest and fynbos elements, as well as
species ‘unique’ to this zone. A short rotation will not allow for the recovery of damaged ecotones
before the next fire, while a too long fire rotation can lead to a high fire intensity, which could
destroy small forest patches. Agricultural and silvicultural activities may also adversely affect the
forest by disturbing the forest margin.
Management objective
To maintain the integrity of the forest patches within the Tsitsikamma National Park through
appropriate management of the forest ecotone.
Sampling methods
Procedure: The extent and outer boundary of the major forest patches in De Vasselot and at
Storms River mouth will be mapped and captured on GIS by 2010. After any major fire, or tree
felling in bordering plantations, the level of damage to the forest/fynbos ecotones will be
assessed.
Spatial scale: Forests at De Vasselot and Storms River Mouth.
17
Temporal scale: Intermittently
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:
 More than 30 % of forest/fynbos ecotone is cleared or disturbed by human activity.
 More than 30 % of the forest/fynbos ecotone is heavily infestation of invader plants, resulting
in heavy fuel load and change in the vegetation structure.
 The fire frequency of the forest margin is less than 10 years.
Determination of thresholds was based on collective judgement.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Determine the reasons why thresholds were exceeded.
 Implement more effective invasive alien plant control where applicable.

Establish better fire management/protection program with adjacent land owners.
Project commencement
Commenced 2008 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Park management (invasive alien plant infestation, fire events & human
activities), Scientific Services (the rest).
 Data interpretation –Scientific Services.
 Data Maintenance – Scientific Services (continue to update records).
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.1.5 SUB-OBJECTIVE - THREATENED BIOTA
2.1.5.1 PROGRAMME - PLANTS
Rationale
Nineteen Red Data plant species have been recorded at TNP (including Soetkraal), of which two
are Endangered (Leucospermum glabrum, Ocotea bullata), six Vulnerable (Mimetes pauciflorus,
Erica inconstans, E. glandulosa fourcadei, Indigofera hispida, Dioscorea sylvatica, Disa cernua),
and the remainder in lower categories or data deficient (South African Plant Red List 2008,
SANBI). Added to the Red Data species are three other plant species of special concern (SSC)
(Strychnos decussata, Hippobromus pauciflorus, Strelitzia alba) on account of their disjunct
distribution in the park. The vegetation (particularly the fynbos) of TNP needs to be managed with
emphasis on the fire regime and alien invasive plants to ensure the long-term persistence of the
vegetation, including the plant SSC. Knowledge of the location, distribution and performance of
populations of plant SSC is inadequate but may be improved through collaboration with the
Threatened Species Program of SANBI, involving volunteers in rare plant species surveys (CREW
programme). Information gained from rare species research/monitoring should inform future
management actions at TNP, and feed into national assessments of the status of rare/threatened
plant species.
Management objective
To protect populations of Red Data plant species found within the Tsitsikamma National Park.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Plant SSC should be searched for during their flowering period, guided, but not
restricted, by historical records of occurrence. The following information should be recorded (as
per the method and datasheet of CREW): locality coordinates, habitat characteristics, estimated
population size, distribution pattern, area of extent, distance to next population, population age
composition, mechanisms of reproduction, pollination and dispersal. A simplified method of data
collection, using Cybertrackers, has been developed that could be employed by park rangers.
18
Uncertainty about future jurisdiction over Soetkraal, and difficult access to the area, currently
constrain monitoring efforts.
Spatial scale: Areas identified from historical records or where plant SSC are likely to occur.
Temporal scale: At least once every five years, and within 18 months after fire.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
 Failure of plant SSC to recruit after fire.
 > 30 % total decline in numbers of plant SSC recorded in known populations over two
successive monitoring intervals.
Thresholds were based on collective judgement and species-specific TPC’Ss may be developed
later as more ecological information on these species becomes available.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess appropriateness of methodology.
 Investigate possible causes of population decline and poor reproduction.
 Investigate elements of fire regime (season, intensity) as potential causes of poor plant
species recruitment, and revise fire plan accordingly.
 Implement more effective invasive alien plant control where applicable.
 Arrange for seed collection by Millennium Seed Bank Project if persistence of park endemics
is at risk.
Project commencement
Needs to be implemented.
Reporting frequency
Bi-annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Scientific Services, CREW (SANBI).
 Data Interpretation – Scientific Services & SANBI (Red-Listing exercise).
 Data Maintenance – Scientific Services & SANBI.
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.1.5.2 PROGRAMME - BLUE DUIKER
Rationale
Forty-one terrestrial mammal species have been recorded for the coastal sector of the park.
These include the Vulnerable blue duiker and six Near-Threatened species, namely the honey
badger, fynbos golden mole, and four bat species. The coastal section of the park is narrow and
largely unfenced and ‘predatory’ species, such as leopard and honey badger, move freely in and
out of the park and they receive relatively little protection from the reserve. Those Red Data Book
species that significantly benefit from the park are the blue duiker Philantomba monticola and the
four insectivorous bat species which roost in caves in the park.
TNP is situated close to the southern distribution limit of the blue duiker, which is a small, shy
forest antelope (Skinner & Smithers 1990). Blue duiker studies in the southern Cape have
investigated population densities, fluctuations in abundance and group structure (von Gadow
1978; Crawford 1984; Crawford & Robinson 1984; Hanekom & Wilson 1991; Seydack et al. 1998).
The population density of duiker in the forest at Storms River Mouth was estimated to be 2
individual per 11 ha in the late 1980s (Hanekom & Wilson 1991). This density corresponds to that
recorded in four other southern Cape forests (von Gadow 1978). The blue duiker is the most
threatened of the terrestrial mammal in TNP, and potential dangers to the local populations are
dogs and poaching, as well as habitat fragmentation due to activities on the borders of the park
(Friedmann & Daly 2004).
19
Management objective
To maintain (through management actions) conditions in Tsitsikamma National Park that are
suitable for the continued existence of the Vulnerable blue duikers.
Sampling methods
Procedure: The number of dogs, snares and blue duiker kills in forest patches of the park will be
recorded during compliance patrols. Faecal pellet counts will be done in a series of 20 x 20m plots
in the forest at Storms River Mouth, as part of a larger study monitoring blue duiker densities in
the Garden Route.
Spatial scale: Dogs and snares recorded in forests at Storms River Mouth and De Vasselot, and
faecal pellets assessments at the former site.
Temporal scale: Pellet counts will be done at least once every five years, while dogs and snares
recorded on regular patrols.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:

Estimates of less than 7 blue duikers/100 ha are recorded on two consecutive counts in the
Storms River Mouth Area.

Marked (> 20 %) increase in the number of dogs and/or snares recorded on two consecutive
annual censuses.
The lower limit for duiker are based on the the density estimates (0.12 & 0.07 duiker/ha) derived
from on pellet counts by Hanekom & Wilson (1991) and that (0.15 duiker/ha) Seydack et al.
(1998) for the Storms River Mouth and De Plaatbos areas, while that for dogs and snares on
collective judgement.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess the appropriateness of the census methodology.
 Ascertain regional/national trends in blue duiker numbers.
 Undertake regular patrols to remove snares and identify sites where dogs are hunting.
 Erect boundary fences in key areas of the park to keep dogs out of the park.
 Remove any stray dogs.
 Attempt to influence development activities on the border of the park to reduce the
fragmentation of the forest habitat.
Project commencement
Commencing in 2009.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection –Scientific Services (pellet counts), Park Management (snares and dogs).
 Data Interpretation – Scientific Services (pellet counts), Park Management (snares and dogs).
 Data Maintenance – Scientific Services (pellet counts), Park Management (snares and dogs).
 Reporting - Scientific Services .
20
2.2. OBJECTIVE –REHABILITATION
2.2.2. SUB-OBJECTIVE - ALIEN PLANTS AND OTHER ALIEN BIOTA
2.2.2.1 PROGRAMME – ALIEN PLANTS
Rationale
Eighteen alien invasive plants have been listed in TNP of which fourteen are established and four
are emergent species. All are considered a potential threat to the indigenous flora. These are silky
hakea Hakea sericea, port jackson Acacia saligna, rooikrans A. cyclops long-leaf wattle A.
longifolia, black wattle A. mearnsii, Australian blackwood, A. melanoxylon gums, Eucalyptus spp.,
pines Pinus radiata and P. pinaster, pricky pear Opuntia sp., castor oil bush Ricinus communis,
and more recently sesbania Sesbania punicea, stink bean Paraserianthes lophantha and Pereskia
sp. Emergent weeds include lantana Lantana camara, bramble Rubus cuneifolius, bugweed,
Solanum maurtitianum and Madeira vine Anredera cordifolia. The Sandstone Fynbos is
susceptible to encroachment by alien invasive plants. The highest densities of invasive plants are
found in Soetkraal, where there are large infestations of hakea on the mountain slopes and black
wattle in the river courses. Soetkraal has been the focal point of much of the alien control work.
Undisturbed forests are resistant to alien invasion and show remarkable recovery potential
following infrequent disturbance (Geldenhuys et al., 1986). In forests, alien invader plants
generally only establish in disturbed forest margins or large gaps in exploited forest. Such
invasions can displace the indigenous vegetation, as well as increasing the fuel load in the forest
ecotone.
Management objective
To effectively control and limit the spread of alien invasive plant populations within Tsitsikamma
National Park.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Alien species will be identified, and the density class (based on stem counts of trees
or cover abundance of shrubs) will be determined for each stand and its extent measured using a
GPS or in the case large infestations 1: 50 000 cadastral maps.
Spatial scale: Throughout the park, but primarily at Soetkraal and De Vasselot.
Temporal scale: Annual assessments.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:




A 10 % increase in distribution or density of previously recorded AIP species within the park.
Presence of any new emergent weed in the park, including Spanish reed (Arundo donax) red
water fern (Azolla filiculoides) and Kariba weed (Salvinia molesta).
Lack of follow-up operations in previously cleared areas at the prescribed time.
Inappropriate control operations, e.g. herbicide spillage, poor application, etc. aggravating the
problem.
The above estimated limits are based on collective judgement.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review TPC via adaptive management cycle.
 Assess appropriateness of methodology.
 Investigation into possible causes of the TPC being exceeded.
 Motivate for greater resources to deal with the plant invasion problem.
 Engage with adjacent land owners if their land is a source for invasive alien species.
 Address inefficiency of control operations or methods.
Project commencement
Commenced 2007 - ongoing
21
Reporting frequency
Annual
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Alien Invasive Species Unit & Park Management.
 Data Interpretation – Alien Invasive Species Unit.
 Data Maintenance – Alien Invasive Species Unit.
 Reporting - Alien Invasive Species Unit.
2.3 OBJECTIVE- RECONCILING BIODIVERSITY WITH OTHER PARK OBJECTIVES
2.3.1 SUB-OBJECTIVE - INTERNAL ACTIVITIES
2.3.1.1 PROGRAMME – EFFLUENT OUTLET
Rationale
Two thirds of the world’s population resides within the coastal zone and this is projected to
increase to three quarters by 2025 (DEAT 2001). Along with the population increase, land based
pollution released into the marine environment increases accordingly. Domestic effluent from the
Storms River Rest-camp is treated by five biofilter purification units. The outflow of three of these
units runs into intertidal gullies below the rest-camp. At times the outflow has been of poor quality,
having elevated levels of suspended solids, ammonia and chemical oxygen demand. This poses a
potential threat to humans and benthic fauna of the intertidal.
Management objective
To ensure that effluent outflow from the Storms River Mouth Rest-camp is not a health hazard to
tourist, staff and intertidal fauna.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Samples of effluent from the sewerage purification plants in the rest-camp are
collected and sent to the Bitou Municipality for chemical and bacterial analysis. Factors tested are
chemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, ammonical nitrogen, pH and faecal coliforms.
Spatial scale: Storms River Mouth Rest-camp.
Temporal scale: Chemical and bacterial analysis done every two months.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:
 Counts of greater than 400 faecal coliforms/100ml are recorded in more than 10% of samples.
 Counts of greater than 2000 faecal coliforms/100ml are recorded in more than 1% of samples.
These values were based on water quality criteria for the South African coastal zone (Lusher
1984).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review TPC via adaptive management cycle.
 Assess appropriateness of methodology.
 Investigation into possible causes of TPC being exceeded.
 Motivate for greater resources to deal with the upgrade the biofilter units.
Project commencement
Chemical analysis commenced in 1990s.
Biological observations will commence in 2008.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
22
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Technical Services (collection of samples for analysis by Bitou Municipality),
Scientific Services (assessment of intertidal pools).
 Data interpretation – Technical Services (water analysis), Scientific Services (intertidal pools).
 Data Maintenance – Technical Services (water analysis), Scientific Services (intertidal pools).
 Reporting - Technical Services (water analysis), Scientific Services (intertidal pools).
2.3.2 SUB-OBJECTIVE - EXTRACTIVE RESOURCE USE
2.3.2.1 PROGRAMME – MARINE FISH UTILIZATION
Rationale
Recreational bait collecting and fishing is permitted in accordance with the Marine Living
Resources Act (1998) along a 9 km stretch of the De Vasselot section of the park. Fishing is
generally selective with larger fish being removed from a population first. Larger and older fish
are more fecund than smaller recently mature fish in that they spawn more eggs which are larger
and stronger, thereby disproportionately contributing to the spawning capacity of a population.
Therefore fishing often rapidly reduces egg production and the genetic fitness of the targeted fish
population (Longhurst 2002; Berkeley et al. 2004), and the status of the catches at De Vasselot
need to be monitored.
The mean recorded cpue of Cowley (2005) in the no-take TNP MPA over an 11 year period was
99 (± SD = 0.14) fish/100 angler-hours. This value is more than double that recorded for open
areas at Port Elizabeth in the 1980s (29 fish/100 angler-hours) and Plettenberg area (37 fish/100
angler-hours) in 2000s (Clarke & Buxton 1989; King 2005). Traditionally in fisheries science, a fish
population is considered: (a) over-exploited once the spawner biomass-per-recruit ratio falls below
40%, and (b) collapsed at ratios below 25% (Griffiths et al. 1999). When the spawner biomassper-recruit ratio falls below 25% there are not enough adults left to reproduce and rebuild the
population.
Management objective
To ensure that fish stocks in the open De Vasselot section of the park are not overexploited as a
consequence of permitted extractive resource use.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Regular roving creel surveys will be undertaken to assess recreational fish catches.
Data recorded will include: numbers of anglers, time spent fishing, bait used, number and size of
each fish species caught.
Spatial scale: De Vasselot coastline.
Temporal scale: Initially monthly surveys of anglers to assess seasonality in catches.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:
 An annual, overall cpue of less than 40 fish/100 angler-hours is recorded for three
consecutive years.
 An annual cpue for blacktail of less than 8 individuals/100 hours is recorded for three
consecutive years by anglers targeting reef species.
 A significant, directional temporal change in the catch composition of the recreational anglers,
as determined by multivariate analysis, towards one that exhibits signs of overexploitation.
Assuming that catch per unit effort would largely mirror spawner biomass-per-recruit ratios, the
lowest acceptable limit was taken as 40% of the catch rate recorded in the no-take Tsitsikamma
MPA (Cowley 2005).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess the appropriateness of the census methodology.
 Ascertain regional/national trends in recreational fish catches.
23


Undertake regular patrols to ensure greater compliance with the legislated bag limits and
close seasons.
Initiate actions to reduce bag limits, and/or fishing pressure in the area.
Project commencement
Commenced: Monitoring of catch data will be implemented in 2008, multivariate analyses in
about 2006 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities

Data collection – Scientific Services assisted by Park Management.

Data interpretation – Scientific Services.

Data Maintenance – Scientific Services.

Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.3.2.2 PROGRAMME – MARINE INVERTEBRATE UTILIZATION
Rationale
Recreational fishing effort along the South African coast has increased drastically since the early
1900s, supporting approximately 500 000 fishers during 1995 (McGrath et al. 1997). As fishing
pressure increases, so does the pressure on the invertebrate species harvested for bait along a 9
km stretch of the De Vasselot section of coast.
Management objective
To ensure that bait stocks in the open De Vasselot section of the park are not overexploited as a
consequence of permitted extractive resource use.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Regular roving creel surveys will be undertaken to assess the extent of bait collecting
on the coast. Details recorded will include: numbers of bait collectors, time spent collecting,
species targeted, numbers and size of each bait organism collected.
Spatial scale: De Vasselot coastline.
Temporal scale: Initially monthly surveys of anglers assess seasonality in catches.
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:


Legislated bag limits for bait organism are exceeded on more than 20% of the fishing outings.
More than 20% of the alikreukel (Turbo sarmaticus) collected are undersized (< 63 mm).
Estimated limits are based on the sustainability matrix of King (2005).
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess the appropriateness of the census methodology.
 Ascertain regional/national trends in recreational fish catches.
 Undertake regular patrols to ensure greater compliance with the legislated bag limits and
close seasons.
 Initiate actions to reduce bag limits, and/or fishing pressure in the area.
Project commencement
Commenced 2008 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
24
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Scientific Services assisted by Park Management.
 Data interpretation – Scientific Services.
 Data Maintenance – Scientific Services.
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
2.4 OBJECTIVE- RECONCILING BIODIVERSITY WITH EXTERNAL THREATS
2.4.1.1. PROGRAMME - POLLUTION OF STREAMS BY GOLF ESTATE
Rationale
The Tsitsikamma Golf estate, which will include more than 400 housing units, a hotel and 18-hole
golf course, is currently being constructed on the northern boundary of the park. A substantial
portion of this development lies in the catchment of a stream, which is currently the primary source
of potable water to the Storms River Mouth Rest-camp. Much of the vegetation has been removed
to build the houses and shape the golf course, increasing sediment deposition in these streams.
On completion the greens and fairways of the golf course will need to be maintained, and golf
courses are notorious for the copious use of herbicides, pesticides, fungicides and fertilizers.
Thus, there is strong possibility that the Tsitsikamma Golf estate will adversely affect the water
quality of the streams supplying potable water to the rest camp.
Management objective
To ensure that the water supply to the Storms River Rest-camp is of a high quality and is not a
health hazard to visitors, tourist and staff.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Park management will request data from LL&L Water Care, consultants paid by the
developer (in terms of Record of Decision) to collect and analyze water samples from the stream,
which flow through the Tsitsikamma Golf Estate and supplies the Storms River rest-camp with
potable water. Approximately 20 different variables are measured (see Preliminary TPC’s below).
In addition to regular sampling, spot samples are taken at three sites along the length of the
stream that flows out into sea next to the restaurant during heavy rainfall conditions. These
samples are sent to the Plettenberg Bay Municipality for analysis of suspended solids, ammonia,
chemical oxygen demand and faecal coliform.
Spatial scale: The section of the stream on the borders of the golf estate and the park.
Temporal scale: LL&L Water Care sampling is done monthly, while that of SANParks is driven by
events that are likely to negatively impact the water quality (e.g. heavy rains).
Preliminary TPC's
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply on
more than two consecutive sampling dates or >25% of the sampling dates:
Chemical/Physical
pH
Electrical Conductivity
Colour
Turbidity
Total Dissolved Solids
Calcium as Ca
Magnesium as Mg
Sulphate as SO4
Nitrate as N
Ammonium as N
Copper as Cu
Potassium as K
Sodium as Na
TPCs
<5.0 or > 9.5
>150
>20
>1
>1 000
>150
>70
>400
>10
>1
>1
>0
>200
Units
pH units
mS/m
mg/l Pt
NTU
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
25
Chemical/Physical
Aluminium as Al
Chloride as Cl
Iron (Total) as Fe
Microbiological
Heterotrophic plate count
Total coliform
Faecal coliform
TPCs
Units
>0.3
>200
>0.2
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
>100
>0
>0
count/ml
count/100 ml
count/100 ml
These TPC’s limits were based largely on (DWAF 1993)
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess the appropriateness of the census methodology.
 Engage with proponent of the Tsitsikamma Golf Estate.
 Request assistance from the Department of Water Affairs.
 Issue an advisory note to the tourists.
 Take legal action against proponent.
Project commencement
Commenced 2008 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection –Park Management (request copies of analytical data from LL&L Water Care).
 Data interpretation – LL&L Water Care & Scientific Services (chemical analysis).
 Data Maintenance – Park Management assisted by Scientific Services.
 Reporting - Park Management assisted by Scientific Services.
2.4.2.1 PROGRAMME – WATER QUALITY OF GROOT ESTUARY
Rationale
Waters of the Groot Estuary are cut off from the sea for varying lengths of time by a sand bar
which forms at the mouth (Morant & Bickerton 1983). This occurs during low river flows combined
with longshore sand movements in the nearshore marine environment (Day 1981).
Development of residential properties and associated infrastructure in Natures Valley on the
estuarine floodplain has in the past been approved by local municipalities. If the estuary is left to
breach naturally, water levels under a typical flooding regime may result in partial inundation of an
access road in Nature’s Valley; the public parking area near the estuary mouth, private gardens
along Lagoon drive, and some camping sites in the SANParks Nature’s Valley rest-camp, in the
mid reaches of the estuary. High water levels also result in the flooding of septic tanks situated on
some waterfront properties, which in turn can result in faecal contamination of the estuary
indicated by high E. coli counts, particularly during draw-down periods. Therefore, the natural
stream flow and salinity regime of the Groot Estuary is affected by fresh water abstraction above
the road bridge and the artificial breaching of the estuary mouth to prevent flooding when water
levels are high.
Management objective
To ensure that the water quality of the Groot River estuary is high quality and that fresh water
abstraction from Groot River is not resulting in elevated salinity values in the estuary.
Sampling methods
Procedure: Regular salinity analyses will be done at fixed localities along the length of estuary,
inspections for signs of sewage pollution, and reports by the public investigated. If necessary
26
data will be requested from the Bitou Municipality on their water quality and bacteriological
sampling conducted along the Groot Estuary will be requested.
Spatial scale – Throughout Groot Estuary.
Temporal scale – Monthly sampling of salinity (SANParks), Weekly water quality and
bacteriological sampling (Bitou Municipality).
Preliminary thresholds of potential concerns (TPC’s)
A threshold of potential concern is reached if one or more of the following conditions apply:



Odours and water colouration that suggest sewage pollution of a magnitude are judged by
SANParks personnel to pose a health risk to the public.
More than 10 percent of the samples taken by the Bitou Municipality have more than 400
faecal coliforms/100ml.
Mean salinity (g kg-1) in surface water of saline waterbodies measured at 30cm depth
exceeds, for a period longer than ninety (90) days the ranges:
• 5.0-35.0 g kg-1 in the lower reaches.
• 0.0-18.0 g kg-1 in the upper reaches during closed phases.
• 0.5-5.0 g kg-1 in the upper reaches during open phases.
The limits for salinity were based on sampling data between 2003 and 2006.
Possible actions if TPC is exceeded
 Review the TPC via the adaptive management cycle.
 Assess the appropriateness of the census methodology.
 Engage with the Nature’s Valley Rate Payers council with respect to freshwater abstraction.
 Request assistance from the Department of Water Affairs.
 Issue an advisory note to the tourists.
 Take legal action against proponent.
Project commencement
Commenced 2003 – ongoing.
Reporting frequency
Annual.
Responsibilities
 Data collection – Park Management request salinity readings, as well as request water quality
and bacteriological from Bitou Municipality.
 Data interpretation – Park Management salinity and water quality and bacteriological from
Bitou Municipality.
 Data maintenance – Park Management and Scientific Services.
 Reporting - Scientific Services.
3. DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING
Not all of the programmes listed above require systematic, regular data collection, and not all could be
undertaken with existing SANParks resources and capacity. Indicators that it is proposed that be
regularly evaluated and reported on, based on data collected during formal monitoring using existing
SANParks capacity and the assistance of outside institutions are:










Recruitment of marine biota into Groot Estuar,
Intertidal mussel beds,
Intertidal bait stocks,
Inshore fish stocks (SAIAB),
Nearshore fish stocks (SAEON),
Blue duiker,
Marine fish utilization,
Marine invertebrate utilization,
Pollution of streams golf estate,
Water quality of Groot estuary
27
Indicators that it is proposed be regularly evaluated and reported on, based on ad hoc data collection
using existing SANParks capacity, are:
 Fire management,
 Indigenous forests,
 Alien plants
4. SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMME
Interpretation of the cause and significance of changes recorded within the monitoring programme can
be facilitated by the availability of supplementary data. For this purpose a complementary surveillance
programme will also be also undertaken. They will entail the regular collection of data, but for which no
TPC’s will be developed. Surveillance collections that will be undertaken with existing SANParks
capacity are:
 Sea temperature - daily measurements at Storms River.
 Sediment movement - sediment profiles measured in the lower portions of Groot River, usually
annually though frequency may alter depending on the interval between breaching.
Surveillance collections that are undertaken by external agencies, but where the available data could
be used to support present and future Tsitsikamma National Park monitoring programmes are:
 Meteorology - continuous measurements (at approximately 1 hour intervals) at Storms River using
automatic weather station (Weather Bureau).
 Nearshore sea temperatures and ocean currents – continuous measurements (at approximately 1
hour intervals) using Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (Marine and Coastal Management), with a
6 -12 month lag between data measurement and availability.
 Water level - continuous measurements (c. 15 min intervals) in Groot Estuary, and the upper
reaches of the Salt River by Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, with a 6 - 9 month lag
between data measurement and availability to SANParks.
 River water temperature - loggers records values every 4 hours at two sites in 11 rivers of the
Tsitsikamma area. Initially monitoring will cover a two year period as part of a CAPE programme.
 Water quality - usually monthly measurement of bacterial content of waters in the Groot River
(west) estuary, with roughly a 3 month lag between data measurement and availability to
SANParks.
5. FUTURE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Relatively few long-term monitoring studies have been undertaken in the park, and this document is
just the first attempt using available data to identify indicator and describe potential thresholds of
potential concern. Therefore, the identification and emphasis of such indicators should form
component of a regular review process. It is also probable, however, that future environmental and/or
legislative changes may necessitate incorporation of indicators not currently included within the
monitoring and surveillance programme. At present it is foreseen that, subject to the availability of
resources and increased SANParks capacity, the monitoring/surveillance program could benefit by
inclusion of assessments of:

Aquatic fauna
The aquatic invertebrates in the rivers of the southern Cape are generally dominated by insects
that are specialised and adapted to cool temperatures and high oxygen levels in the waters (De
Moor 1998). Surveys of the Salt River, which is an unusual river system with no indigenous
freshwater fish species in its middle and upper reaches, revealed a diverse community of aquatic
insects (Barber-James 2000; De Moor & Barber-James 2001; De Moor et al. 2004). Many of these
invertebrates show a high degree of ecological specialisation due to the absence of fish in the
system, and include three previously undescribed genera and 13 undescribed species (De Moor
et al. 2004). Preliminary data from current surveys of other streams of the Tsitsikamma region
suggest that the Elandsbos, Bloukrans and Groot (west) rivers may also have unusual aquatic
invertebrate fauna. Unfortunately substantial sections of these rivers extend beyond the
boundaries of the park and outside activities potentially threaten the continued existence of the
invertebrate communities.
28

Slender Redfin Minnow
The fresh water streams in the Tsitsikamma region are generally impoverished (Smith & Smith
1966), and only four indigenous fish species have been recorded in the sections of the rivers
protected by the park (Russell 2002). However, one of these is the Endangered slender redfin
Pseudobarbus tenius, which has been recorded in the Langbos-, Diep- and Palmiet rivers in then
contractual Soetkraal area of the park (Russell 2002). The joint management contract between
SANParks and Rand Mine Properties has lapsed, and SANParks is negotiating to acquire the
property. Soetkraal potentially provides SANParks with a unique opportunity to conserve the
slender redfin, provided the threat of alien wattle infestations and predatory bass species can be
contained (Russell 2002).

Knysna leaf-folding frog
The Endangered Knysna leaf-folding frog Afrixalus knysnae is found in coastal wetlands along a
short (c. 100 km) stretch of coast between Covie in the east and Groenvlei in the west (Minter et
al. 2004), and adult frogs have been recorded close to the borders of the De Vasselot section of
the park (Branch & Hanekom 1987). The survival of this species is threatened by changes to or
loss of habitat through urban-, forestry- and/or agricultural development (Minter et al. 2004).

Cape cormorant
Three Near-threatened seabird species have been recorded breeding in the park, namely Cape
cormorant Phalacrocorax capensis, African black oystercatcher Haematopus moquini and in 2003
crowned cormorant Phalacrocorax coronatus (Crawford 1983; Whittington 2004). However, only
the Cape cormorant breeds in substantial numbers (> 35 pairs). This species is endemic to
southern Africa. There are approximately 60 breeding colonies, which vary greatly in extent
(Cooper et al. 1982; Berruti 1989). Individual breeding colonies may also vary in size from year to
year (Duffy et al. 1987). The overall number of Cape cormorant in southern Africa declined from
approximately 500 000 pairs in the 1970s to 120 000 pairs in the mid- 1980s (Berruti 1989). This
species is largely dependent on surface shoals of fish as food, and the numbers of Cape
cormorants that breed are affected by food availability (Crawford & Shelton 1978, 1981 in
Crawford et al. 1983), while their breeding success is susceptible to temporary and local
shortages in abundance of fish stocks (Crawford et al. 1986; Berruti 1989; Crawford & Dyer 1995).
Research on the West Coast found that Cape cormorants abandoned nests when their main prey
item (anchovy) was scarce and deferred breeding until anchovy became more plentiful (Crawford
et al 1983; Crawford & Dyer 1995).

Abalone
Abalone Haliotis midae, is harvested extensively for culinary purposes (Tarr 1989). It is a long
lived mollusc that only reaches sexual maturity after 8-10 years. Adults occupy crevices or
exposed positions on shallow reefs, and feed on algae. Abalone is a CITES (Appendix III)
species, and its stocks are presently facing a severe crisis as a result of large scale poaching and
ecological changes in parts of it distributional range (Griffiths et. al. 2004). Illegal harvesting is
occurring in the Tsitsikamma National Park, especially in the De Vasselot section of the park, and
the impact on the abalone of the park is unknown.
Finding the appropriate balance between inclusively, economy and efficiency will be ongoing.
6. REFERENCES
ANON. 1999. Assessment of the marine resource availability for subsistence fisheries along the coast of
South Africa. Centre for Marine Studies, University of Cape Town.
ATTWOOD, C.G. & B.A. BENNETT. 1995a. A procedure for setting daily bag limits on recreational
shore-fishery of the South-Western Cape, South Africa. South African Journal of marine Science
15: 241 – 252.
BARBER-JAMES, H.M. 2000. Preliminary investigation of the freshwater macroinvertebrates in the Salt
River, in relation to the proposed stocking of trout into the upper salt river, Farm 236, The Crags.
Albany Museum Environmental Impact Assessment Report. 18pp
BEKKER, S.J. 1994. The management of fynbos mountain catchments. In: Van der Sijde, H.A. (Ed.).
South African Forestry Handbook. Southern African Institute of Forestry. Pretoria. pp. 691-714.
BENNETT, R.H. 2007. Optimisation of a sampling protocol for long-term monitoring of temperature reef
fishes. M.Sc. thesis, Rhodes University. Grahamstown.
29
BENNETT, B.A., ATTWOOD, C.G. & J.D. MANTEL 1994. Teleost catches by three shore-angling clubs
in the South-western Cape, with an assessment of the effect of restrictions applied in 1985. South
African Journal of Marine Science 14: 11 – 18.
BERKELEY, S.A., CAPMAN, C. & S. SOGARD 2004. Maternal age as a determinant of larval growth
and survival in marine fish, Sebastes melanops. Ecology 85 (5): 1258 – 1264.
BERRUTI, A. 1989. Resident seabirds. Pp 257-273. In: Payne, A.I.L. & R.J.M. Crawford (eds). Oceans of
Life off southern Africa. Vlaeberg Publishers, Cape Town.
BERRY, P.F. 1978. Reproduction, growth and production in the mussel Perna perna (L) on the east
coast of South Africa. Oceanographic Research Institute Investigational Report 48: 1- 28.
BERRY, P.F. 1982. Biomass and density of detritivores on a littoral rocky reef on the Natal coast, with an
estimate of population production for the ascidian Pyura stolonifera Oceanographic Research
Institute Investigational Report 53: 1- 15.
BIGGS, H.C. & K.H. ROGERS 2003. An adaptive system to link science, monitoring and management in
practice. In: Du Toit J.T., Rogers K.H. & H.C. Biggs (eds) The Kruger Experience. Ecology and
management of savanna heterogeneity. Island Press. Washington. pp 59-80.
BOWNES S AND MCQUAID CD 2006. Will the invasive mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis Lamarck
replace the indigenous Perna perna L. on the south coast of South Africa? Journal of Experimental
Marine Biology and Ecology 338: 140-151.
BRANCH, G.M. & M. BRANCH 1981. The Living Shores of Southern Africa. C. Struik Publishers, Cape
Town.
BRANCH, W.R. & N. HANEKOM 1987. The herpetofauna of the Tsitsikamma National Park. Koedoe 30:
49 - 61.
BROUWER, S.L. 1997. An assessment of the South African east coast linefishery from Kei Mouth to Still
Bay. M.Sc. thesis. Rhodes University, Grahamstown.
BROUWER, S.L. 2001. Tsitsikamma linefish population assessment – Final report. Progress report for
South African National Parks for 2000. 27 pp.
BROUWER S.L. 2004. Biology, population structure and management of carpenter (Argyrozona
argyrozona) an endemic South African reef fish. Ph.D. thesis. Rhodes University, Grahamstown.
BROUWER S.L. & C.D. BUXTON 2002. Catch and effort of the shore and skiboat linefisheries along the
South African Eastern Cape coast. South African Journal of marine Science 24: 341 - 354.
BROUWER S.L., GRIFFITHS, M.H. & M.J. ROBERTS 2003. Adult movement and larval dispersal of
Argyrozona argyrozona (Pisces: Sparidae) from a temperate marine protected area. African Journal
of marine Science 25: 395 - 402.
BROWN, A.C. & JARMAN, N. 1978. Coastal marine habitats. In Biogeography and Ecology of Southern
Africa, (eds) Werger, M.J.A. & A.C. van Bruggen, 1241 – 1277. W. Junk. The Hague.
BURGER, L.F. 1990. The distribution patterns and community structure of the Tsitsikamma rocky littoral
ichthyofauna. M.Sc. thesis. Rhodes University, Grahamstown, R.S.A.
BUXTON, C.D. 1987. Life history changes of two reef fish species in exploited and unexploited marine
environments in South Africa. Ph.D. thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown.
BUXTON, C.D. & M. J. SMALE. 1984. A preliminary investigation of the marine ichthyofauna of the
Tsitsikamma Coastal National Park. Koedoe 27: 13 - 24.
COOPER, J., BROOKE, R.K, SHELTON, P.A. & R.J.M. CRAWFORD. 1982. Distribution, population size
and conservation of the Cape Cormorant, Phalacrocorax capensis. Fisheries Bulletin of South Africa
16: 121 -143
COWLEY, P. D. 2000. Shore-tagging in the Tsitsikamma National Park. Tagging News 13: 9 – 11.
COWLEY, P D. 2005. Monitoring of inshore linefish resources in Tsitsikamma National Park. Report
submitted to Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. 25pp.
COWLEY, P.D., BROUWER, S.L. and R.L. TILNEY 2002 - The role of the Tsitsikamma National Park in
the management of four shore-angling fishes along the South-eastern Cape Coast of South Africa.
South African Journal of Marine Science 24: 27-35.
COWLING, R.M. & HEIJNIS, C.E. 2001. The identification of Broad Habitat Units as biodiversity entities
for systematic conservation planning in the Cape Floristic Region. South African Journal of Botany
67:15-38.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M. 1983. Seabirds breeding in the Tsitsikamma Coastal National Park. Koedoe 26:
145 - 153.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M. 1984. Activity group structure and lambing of blue duikers Cephalophus monticola
in the Tsitsikamma National Parks, South Africa. South African Journal of Wildlife Research. 14 (3) 65
- 68.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M. & B.M. DYER. 1995. Responses by four seabirds to a fluctuating availability of
Cape Anchovy Engraulis capensis off South Africa. Ibis 137: 329-339.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M. & G.A. ROBINSON 1984. History of the blue duiker Cephalophus monticola
populations in the Tsitsikamma Forest and Coastal National Parks. Koedoe 27: 61 - 73.
30
CRAWFORD, R.J.M., SHELTON, P.A., & A. BERRUTI. 1983. Cape Cormorants as potential indicators of
pelagic fish stocks off Southern Africa. South African Journal of Science 79: 466 – 468.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M & P.A. SHELTON 1978. Pelagic fish and seabird interrelationships off the coasts of
South West and South Africa. Biological Conservation 14: 86 – 109.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M & P.A. SHELTON, 1981. Population trends for some southern African seabirds
related to fish availability. In Proceedings of Symposium on Bird of Sea and Shore. Cooper, J. (ed)
African Seabird Group, Cape Town, 15 – 41.
CRAWFORD, R.J.M., WILLIAMS, A.J., AND P.B. CRAWFORD 1986. A note on mortality of seabirds off
western southern Africa, October 1985 – February 1986. South African Journal marine Science 4:
119 – 123.
DAY, J.H. 1981. Coastal hydrodynamics, sediment transport and inlet stability. In: Day, J.H. (Ed.)
Estuarine Ecology with particular reference to southern Africa. A.A. Balkema Cape Town. 7-25.
DE MOOR, F. C 1998. Freshwater invertebrates. In: Lubke, R. & I.R. de Moor (Eds) Field guide to the
Eastern & Southern Cape coast. University of Cape Town Press. Cape Town. 198 - 204 pp.
DE MOOR, F. C. AND BARBER-JAMES H. M. 2001. Report on the second survey of macroinvertebrates
to assess the potential impact of trout stocking in the upper Salt River, The Crags. Albany Museum
Environmental Impact Assessment Report. 32pp.
DE MOOR, F.C., DE MOOR, I.J., JAMES, N.P.E. & H.M. BARBER-JAMES 2004. An autumn survey of
the freshwater macroinvertebrates in the Salt River, Southern Cape. Albany Museum Investigational
Contract Report for Nature's Valley Trust. September 2004.
DEAT 2001. Coastcare fact sheets series, 2D. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.
DEPARTMENT OF WATER AFFAIRS & FORESTRY 1993. South African Water Quality Guidelines.
Volume 1. Domestic Use. Pretoria.
DUFFY, D.C., R.P. WILSON & M.P. WILSON 1987. Spatial and temporal patterns of diet in the Cape
Cormorant of southern Africa. The Condor 89: 830 – 834.
FRIEDMANN, Y. & B. DALY (eds) 2004. Red Data Book of the mammals of South Africa: A conservation
assessment: CBSG Southern Africa, Conservation Breeding specialist Group (SSC/IUCN)
Endangered Wildlife Trust. South Africa.
GELDENHUYS, C.J., LE ROUX, P.J. & COOPER, K.H., 1986. Alien invasions in indigenous evergreen
forest. In: Macdonald, I.A.W., Kruger, F.J. & Ferrar, A.A. (Eds.). The ecology and management of
biological invasions in southern Africa. Proceedings of the National Synthesis Symposium on the
ecology of biological invasions. Oxford University Press.
GELDENHUYS, C.J. 1992. Disjunctions and distribution limits of forest species in the Southern Cape.
South African Forestry Journal 161: 1 - 14.
GELDENHUYS, C.J. 1993. Floristic composition of the southern Cape forests with an annotated
checklist. South African Journal of Botany. 59 (1): 26 - 44.
GRIFFITHS, M.H., ATTWOOD, C. & R. THOMPSON 1999. New Management protocol for the South
African Linefishery. In Mann, B.Q. (ed). Proceedings of Marine Linefish Symposium 29 April – 1 May
1999. SANCOR Occasional Report 5: 159 pp.
GRIFFITHS, C.L. & G.M. BRANCH 1997. The exploitation of coastal invertebrates and seaweeds in
South Africa: Historical trends, ecological impacts and implications for management. Transaction of
the Royal Society of South Africa 52(1): 121 - 148.
GRIFFITHS, C.L., HOCKEY, P.A.R., VAN ERKOM SCHURINK, C. and LE ROUX, P.J. 1992. Marine
invasive aliens on South African shores: implications for community structure and trophic functioning.
In: Payne, A.I.L., Brink, K.H., Mann, K.H. and R. Hilborn (eds). Benguela Trophic Functioning, South
African Journal of Marine Science 12: 713 – 722.
GÖTZ, A. 2005. Assessment of the effect of Goukamma Protected Area on community structure and
fisheries dynamics. Ph.D. thesis. Rhodes University, Grahamstown
GÖTZ, A., COWLEY, P.D. & H. WINKER 2008. Selected fishery and population parameters of eight
shore-angling species in the Tsitsikamma National park no-take marine reserve. African Journal of
marine Science 30 (3): 519 - 532.
GRANT, W.S. & CHERRY, M.I. 1985. Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk. in southern Africa. Journal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 90 (2): 179 – 191.
GRIFFITHS, C.L., VAN SITTER, L. , BEST, P.B., BROWN, A.C., CLARK, B.M., COOK, P.A.,
CRAWFORD, R.J.M., DAVID, J.H.M., DAVIES, B.R., GRIFFITHS, M.H., HUTCHINGS, K.,
JERARDINO, A., KRUGER, N., LAMBERTH, S., LESLIE, R.W., R. MELVILLE-SMITH, TARR, R. &
C.D. VAN DER LINGEN 2004. Impacts of human activities on marine animal life in the Benguela:
Historical overview. Oceanographic and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 42: 303 – 392.
HALPERN B.S. 2003. The impact of marine reserves: do reserves work and does size matter?
Ecological applications 13: 117-137.
HAMMOND W. & C.L. GRIFFITHS 2004. Influence of wave exposure on South African mussel beds and
their associated infaunal communities. Marine Biology 144: 547- 552.
31
HANEKOM, N. 2008. Invasion of an indigenous Perna perna mussel bed on the south coast of South
Africa by an alien mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis and its effect on the associated fauna. Biological
Invasion 10: 233 – 244.
HANEKOM, N. & P. S. COETZEE 1990. Subtidal macrobenthic community survey of the Tsitsikamma
National Park. Poster paper. Zoological society of Southern Africa Symposium: The influence of water
availability and water movement in animal ecology: terrestrial and aquatic systems, University of Port
Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.
HANEKOM, N. & V. WILSON. 1991. Blue duiker Philantomba monticola densities in the Tsitsikamma
National Parks and probable factors limiting these populations. Koedoe 34 (2) 107 – 120.
HARRISON, T.D., COOPER, J.A.G., RAMM, A.E.L. & SINGH, R.A. 1996. Health of South African
estuaries, Groot (Wes) – Great Fish. Executive Report, Coastal and Catchment Environmental
Programme, CSIR, Durban. Movement patterns and home range of Roman Chrysoblephus laticeps.
HEELEMANN, S., PROCHES, S., REBELO, A.G., VAN WILGEN, B.W., POREMBSKI, S. & COWLING,
R.M. 2008. Fire season effects on the recruitment of non-sprouting serotinous Proteaceae in the
eastern (bimodal rainfall) fynbos biome, South Africa. Austral Ecology 33(2): 119-127.
KERWATH S.E., GOTZ A, ATTWOOD C.G., COWLEY PD, & W.H.H. SAUER 2007. Movement pattern
and home range of roman Chrysoblephus laticeps. African Journal of marine Science 29: 93-103.
KING, C. M. 2005 - Towards a new approach to coastal governance with an assessment of the
Plettenberg Bay shore based linefishery. M.Sc. Thesis. Rhodes University, Grahamstown. 172pp.
LE MAITRE, D.C. 1988. The effects of parent density and season of burn on the regeneration of
Leucadendron laureolum (Proteaceae) in the Kogelberg. South African Journal of Botany 54(6):
581-584.
LOMBARD, T.A., STRAUSS, T., HARRIS, J. SINK, K. ATTWOOD, C. & L. HUTCHINGS 2005. South
African National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment 2004: Technical Report. Volume 4: Marine
Component. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute.
LONGHURST, A. 2002. Murphy’s law revisited: longevity as a factor in recruitment to fish populations.
Fisheries Research 56: 125 – 131.
LUSHER, J.A. 1984. Water quality criteria for the South African coastal zone. South African National
Scientific Programmes Report No 94. CSIR, Pretoria.
MACKENZIE, B.L. 2005. An assessment of the shore baitfishery in the Eastern Cape. M.Sc. thesis.
Rhodes University. Grahamstown.
MANN, B.Q. 1992. Aspects of the biology of two inshore sparid fishes (Diplodus sargus capensis and D.
cervinus hottentotus) off the south-east coast of South Africa. M.Sc. thesis, Rhodes University,
Grahamstown
MANN, B.Q. (ed.) 2000. Southern African Marine Linefish Status Reports. Special Publication
Oceanographic Research Institute 7: 1-257.
MARGOLIUS, R.A. & N., SALAFSKY 1998. Measures of success: designing, managing and monitoring
conservation and development projects. Island Press, Washington DC, USA.
McGRATH MD, HORNER CCM, BROUWER SL, LAMBERTH SJ, MANN BQ, SAUER WHH, &
ERASMUS C. 1997. An economic valuation of the South African linfishery. South African Journal of
marine Science 18: 203 – 221.
McLACHLAN, A. & H.W. LOMBARD. 1980. Seasonal variations in energy and biochemical components
of an edible gastropod (Mollusca). Aquaculture 19:117 - 125.
McLACHLAN, A. & H.W. LOMBARD. 1981. Growth and production in exploited and unexploited
populations of a rocky shore gastropod, Turbo sarmaticus. Veliger 23 (3) 221 - 229.
MCQUAID C.D. & T.E. PHILLIPS 2000. Limited wind-driven dispersal of intertidal mussel larvae: in situ
evidence from the plankton and the spread of the invasive species. Marine Ecology Progress Series
201: 211-220.
MINTER, L.R., BURGER, M. HARRISON, J.A. BRAACK, H.H., BISHOP, P.J. & D. KLOEPFER, (eds)
2004. Atlas and Red data Book of the frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. SI/MAB Series
#9. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
MOLDAN, A.G.S. 1989. Marine pollution. In Payne, A.I.L. & R.J.M. Crawford (eds) Oceans of Life off
southern Africa. Vlaeberg Publication.
MOLL, E.J., 1983. The Southern Cape Forests. South African Forestry Journal 127: 31-34.
MORANT, P.D. & I.B. BICKERTON. 1983. Estuaries of the Cape. Part II: Synopses of available
information on individual systems. Report no 19: Groot (wes) (CMS23) & Sout (CMS 22). CSIR
Research Report 418. CSIR Stellenbosch.
MUCINA, L. & M.C. RUTHERFORD (Eds) 2006. The vegetation map of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
MULLER, S. 1984. Studies on the ecology, feeding, growth and reproduction of Haliotis spadicea
Donovan, 1808. Mollusca, Gastropoda. M.Sc. thesis, University of Port Elizabeth. 1 – 195.
32
POMEROY, R.S., PARKS, J.E. & L.M. WATSON 2004. How is your MPA doing? A guidebook of natural
and social indicators for evaluating marine protected area management effectiveness. IUCN, Gland,
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 216pp.
PRADERVAND, P & R. HISEMAN 2006. An analysis of the recreational shore fishery in the Goukamma
Marine Protected Area. African Zoology 41 (2): 275 – 289.
RIUS V.M. 2004 The effect of the invasive mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis and human exploitation on the
indigenous mussel Perna perna on the South Coast of South Africa. M.Sc. thesis, Department of
Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, South Africa, 203 pp.
RIUS M. & C.D. MCQUAID 2006. Wave action and competitive interaction between the invasive mussel
Mytilus galloprovincialis and the indigenous Perna perna in South Africa. Marine Biology 150 (1): 69
– 78.
ROBERTS C.M. & N.V.C. POLUNIN. 1991. Are marine reserves effective in management of reef
fisheries? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 1: 65 - 91.
ROBINSON G.A. & G. DE GRAAFF 1994. Marine protected areas of the Republic of South Africa
Council for the Environment. IUCN.
ROBINSON, T.B., GRIFFITHS, C.L., MCQUAID, C.M. & M. RIUS 2005 Marine alien species of South
Africa – status and impacts. African Journal of Marine Science 27 (1): 297- 306.
ROGERS, K.H. 2003. Adopting a heterogeneity paradigm: Implications for management of protected
savannas. In: Du Toit, JT, Rogers KH & Biggs HC (eds) The Kruger Experience. Ecology and
management of savanna heterogeneity. Island Press. Washington. pp 41-58.
ROGERS, K.H. & R. BESTBIER 1997. Development of a protocol for the definition of the desired state of
riverine systems in South Africa. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria.
RUSSELL, I.A. 2002. Freshwater fishes of Tsitsikamma National Park. Koedoe 45 (2): 13 – 17.
SALAFSKY, N., MARGOLIUS, R. & K. REDFORD 2001. Adaptive Management: a tool for conservation
practioners. Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC, USA et al. 2001.
SAMLMA 2001. South African Marine Linefish Management Association Executive Committee meeting
minutes. January 2001. Oceanographic Research Institute.
SEED R (1996) Patterns of biodiversity in the macro-invertebrate fauna associated with mussel patches
on rocky shores. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 76: 203 – 210.
SEYDACH, A.H.W, HUISAMEN, J. & R. KOK 1998. Long-term antelope population monitoring in
Southern Cape Forests. South African Forestry Journal 182: 9 - 19.
SEYDACK, A.H.W., SOUTHWOOD, A.J., BEKKER, S.J. DE LANGE, C., SWART, J.A.J. & VOGES, K.
1986. Regional policy memorandum for the management of mountain catchment areas in the Southern
Cape and Tsitsikamma forest regions. Department of Environment Affairs, Knysna. 59 pp. Unpublished.
SMITH, M. K. S. 2005. Towards a new approach to coastal governance with an assessment of the
Plettenberg Bay near shore linefisheries. M.Sc. thesis, Rhodes University, Grahamstown. 218 pp.
STOCK, W.D. & ALLSOPP, N. 1992. Functional perspective of ecosystems. In: Cowling, R.M. (Ed.).
The ecology of fynbos. Nutrients, fire and diversity. Oxford University Press, Cape Town. pp. 241259.
SUCHANEK TH (1985) Mussels and their role in structuring rocky shore communities. In: PG Moore and
Seed R (eds) The Ecology of Rocky Coasts, pp 70–96. Columbia University Press, New York
TARR, R.J.Q. 1989. Abalone. In Payne, A.I.L. & R.J.M. Crawford (eds) Oceans of Life off southern
Africa. Vlaeberg Publication.
TEIE, W.C. 2003. Fire manager’s handbook on veld and forest fires. Strategies, tactics and safety. South
African edition. Southern African Institute of Forestry. Menlo Park. 488 pp.
UNDERHILL, L.G., BARTLETT, P.A., BAUMANN, L., CRAWFORD, J.R.M., DYER, B.M., GILDENHUYS,
A., NEL, D.C., OATLEY, T.B., THORNTON, M., UPFOLD, L., WILLIAMS A.J., WHITTINGTON
P.A. and A.C. WOLFAARDT. 1999. Mortality and survival of African Penguins Spheniscus
demersus involved in the Appollo Sea oil spill: an evaluation of rehabilitation efforts. Ibis: 141: 29
– 37.
UNDERHILL, L.G., WHITTINGTON, P.A., CRAWFORD, J.R.M. and A.J. WILLIAMS 1997. Results of
monitoring oiled African penguins Spheniscus demersus for three years after the Appollo Sea
incident of June 1994. Sula 11 (3): 187 – 192.
VAN ERKOM SCHURINK, C. & GRIFFITHS, C.L. 1990. Marine mussels of southern Africa – their
distribution patterns, standing stocks, exploitation and culture. Journal of Shellfish Research 9 (1):
75 – 85.
VAN WILGEN, B.W. 1981. Some effects of fire frequency on fynbos plant community composition and
structure at Jonkersberg, Stellenbosch. South African Forestry Journal 118: 42-55.
VAN WILGEN, B.W., 1987. Fire regimes in the fynbos biome. In: Cowling, R.M., Le Maitre, D.C.,
McKenzie, B., Prys-Jones, R.P. & Van Wilgen, B.W. (Eds.). Disturbance and the dynamics of fynbos
biome communities. South African National Scientific Programmes Report No. 135. CSIR, Pretoria.
pp. 6-14.
33
VAN WILGEN, B.W., BOND, W.J. & RICHARDSON, D.M. 1992. Ecosystem management. In: Cowling,
R.M. (Ed.). The ecology of fynbos. Nutrients, fire and diversity. Oxford University Press, Cape Town.
pp. 345-371.
VAN WILGEN, B.W. & VIVIERS, M. 1985. The effect of season of fire on serotinous Proteaceae in the
Western Cape and the implications for fynbos management. South African Forestry Journal 33: 4953.
VLOK, J.H.J., EUSTON-BROWN D.I.W. & WOLF, T. 2008. A vegetation map for the Garden Route
Initiative. Unpublished 1:50 000 maps and report supported by CAPE Fsp Task Team.
VON GADOW, K. 1978. A pellet count of blue duiker and bushbuck in the Knysna forests. South African
Forestry Journal 107: 77 - 81.
WHITFIELD A.K. 1989a. Ichthyoplankton interchange in the mouth region of a southern African estuary.
Marine Ecology Progress Series 54: 25-33.
WHITFIELD A.K. 1989b. Recruitment of ichthyoplankton into the Swartvlei Estuarine System. J.L.B. Smith
Institute of Ichthyology Investigational Report No. 30: 5 pp.
WHITFIELD A.K. 1992. Juvenile fish recruitment over an estuarine bar. Ichthos 36: 23.
WHITFIELD AK (1998) Biology and ecology of fishes in southern African estuaries. Ichthyological
monograph of the J.L.B. Smith Institute of Ichthyology No. 2. 223 pp.
WHITFIELD, A.K. 2000. Available scientific information on individual South African estuarine systems.
Water Research Commission Report No. 577/3/00. WRC, Pretoria. 217pp.
WHITTINGTON, P. A. 2004. New breeding locality for Crowned cormorant. Koedoe 47.
WOOD, A.D., BROUWER, S.L., COWLEY, P.D. & T.D. HARRISON 2000. An updated checklist of the
ichthyofaunal species assemblage of the Tsitsikamma National Park, South Africa. Koedoe 43 (1): 83
– 95.
YSSEL, S. G. 1989. Long term trends in a population of Turbo sarmaticus, Linneaus 1758, in the
Tsitsikamma Coastal National Park. M.Sc. thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. 132pp.