Conservation Thread

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, There is no safe threshold concentration. Cyanide is a very potent toxin. Get it? Distorting the trends presented in my paper is also unacceptable. Cyanide is totally unacceptable and always will be.

The only reason that it is still in use, is because BFAR did not use the CDT results to prosecute the exporters and collectors when they had the data from IMA's CDT analyses. The exporters used death threats, threats of legal action, and other forms of intimidation against Dr. Pratt of IMA and even against the head of BFAR, Guillermo Morales (the only BFAR head with the guts to stand up to them).

It is silly on your part to defend the use of cyanide. The result may be the shut down of the trade. If the trade had truly supported net-training and other reform measures, you would not have to deal with the USCRTF.

The problem is not confined to the aquarium trade, so I sympathize with retailers (like Dizzy) that are concerned about the future of their own businesses. They did not create the problem, and if the only fish available are cyanide-caught they buy them. That still does not make it legal or acceptable.

I have long stated that we need to implement CDT in the country of origin. Philippine and Indonesian laws need to be applied against those most responsible, which is not the collectors, but against the middemen and exporters who distribute the cyanide. This needs to be done before the remaining reefs are destroyed.

People like Steve Robinson need to be enlisted to train collectors to use nets. Shooting the messenger (who is offering his services) is not the answer.

Peter Rubec

 

[Jaime Baquero]

Greg,

Almost two decades since many problems related to the trade of marine ornamentals were identified. Since then, NGOs have been trying to find solutions. Those efforts, were isolated efforts that didn't make any dent. NGOs didn't get the support from the industry to finance net training programs in the Philippines. There has been also lack of commitment and willigness from the Filipino government to control "the trade of Cyanide" which is getting in the country for industry purposes. Unfortunately, part of that cyanide is getting in the wrong hands with the results that we all know.

I understand that the Filipino government "has" other priorities as you mentioned, what I can not understand is how the government is neglecting so badly such an important natural resource as are coral reefs.

I do think that the future of the MO industry depends on the results of MAC's programs. So far, MAC has been the only organization with the
capacity to gather all the stakeholders of this trade. I have been following MAC since it was MAFC meaning day 1. It is not an easy task what MAC is trying to do, it will take time, and more important, the participation of each one of us involved in this trade as hobbyists or 'money makers".

The equitable trade of marine ornamental fish to provide with economic incentives to the collectors is the way out. That can be done only if iniciatives such as MAC are supported.

MAC is the last chance this trade has, positive results are the only way to avoid heavy restrictions or a ban.

There are interested people in this forum who want to develop good relations with people working in the field, those people can contribute in a positive way to find solutions to the many questions and problems identified long ago.


Jaime

 

[Kalkbreath]

Peter,lets look at it from another angle then.
It's about perspective. If its no concern to you that MO collection might not have any impact on the reefs, and its all about "principle"
Then lets explore that angle.
There are many activities which humans force the planet and the environment to endure every day .
A world where 100% of the users play fair doesn't exist.
You demand 100% eco compliance From third world natives, Yet Over look what is happening in your own back yard.
Take Speeders on our roads as an example.
I can prove using your position that American drivers kill more people and coral then the trade.

These law breakers kill more innocent people then the trade every day.They kill more wild life , like deer and squirrels ......
These same drivers are actually more responsible for killing coral around the world with their CO2 emitting SUVS then the tiny amount of coral spotted by the 20% of law breaking Mo collectors.
Your own study found that cyanide use is in the minority, even in PI.
With all the other collection locations the trade collects from with nets.
That 20 percent is chopped down to about 5 percent based on world wide collection of pet fish when we include Fiji Tonga etc.
Your own state of Florida has less healthy reefs then The Philippines yet you still foist you plan of the "perfect world " on people simply trying to feed their families. Your own reefs are in much more Grave danger, why choose to overlook that Floridians could save thier reefs if they really wanted to. Or are we going to pretent that Florida just need more "TRAINING" Can we teach Florida how to live and work with out harming the Keys? Does Jeb Bush want to help but just lacks the proper net training?
Which activity is less necessary? Driving your SUv around the sun shine state an flushing you poop into the OCean . .......or feeding your family of ten on some lowly island hut in the Philippines? Do you really "NEED "to have your yard sprayed with pesticides? Or are you simply trying to save time over hande netting ....I mean hand pulling the crabgrass?
Nobody is in favor of poison fishing , but iT most likely is that there will alway be a little of it.
I can't think of one activity in America where less then ten percent of the public doesn't cheat. Taxes, Spouses, baseball..........its a non perfect world we live in .
Keeping the cheating from getting out of control is all we can hope for.
And twenty percent is hardly "Rampant"
To demand more then 20% responsibility from the islanders or Americans is absurd.
Get your own tribe in line , then youll be in a position to preach across the Ocean.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, You seem to forget that I work for the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission. At least it has 800 law enforcement agents that enforce Florida statutes concerning fish and wildlife.

However, I agree that there are lots of fish to fry. I had nothing to do with the USCRTF's latest pronouncements on cyanide fishing and threatenend and endangered corals. In many ways, I am sympathetic to the concerns of the trade. I don't want it shut down. Why not try to make it sustainable, so you and your colleagues can stay in business?

PS-I don't have a fancy SUV. However, the beach at Fort DeSoto Park is nice at this time of year.

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

Never had your yard sprayed for mole crickets, chinch bugs or dollar weed?
How many palmettos were bulldosed to build your dwelling? the parks turnpikes and wally world?
'

I can prove that your fellow statesman are killing the waterways of your state.......Can you do the same for MO collectors? Is it time to shut down the states tourism? Going on vacation is a lot like having a pet fish.
If it means harmimg the enviroment, is tourism nessesary?
You give the Americans in PI a hard time for not fullfilling there mission yet,
Can you name one meaningfull contribution the 800 or so agents you work with in FLA have done to curb the dying corals or the health of the reefs in your state?

How many exotic species have been prevented from establishing their kind in the states waters and land? Plants?
Tens of thousands of state officals seem powerless in steming the declining waterways or the fate of mantees staghorn corals or the introduction of non native pests.
Fire ants in the north , white band in the south, Red tide in the west and wild fires in the east are trashing your state far beyond anything seen in the Indo Islands. All of your states eco disasters can be traced to native floridians woofull disreguard for the environment.
Again I ask, where is the proof that our industry needs to be shut down?
I have plenty of evidence that your state needs to be.

 

[Kalkbreath]

I want to again state that I in no way wish to denigrate the intentions of the Ecco minded.
Wanting to preserve mother natures treasures is to be commended.
My harsh tone is fair play though, to those who pin the tail with a blind fold on.
We as a hobby have been the blunt of half truths and misguided science for far too long.
Hopefully Having the shoe on the other foot illustrates to denigrators how easy it is to point fingers and make demands on an industry which has little control over who ultimately collects our fish , let alone far off social problems and human short comings.
In America, our homes are built with illegal labor, our fruits are picked by non documented workers and most of the goods and products we buy at Walmart are made in un seen sweat shops around the world.
Do we really think were in a position to demand to know who and how every one of our our pet fish are collected?

In America today , just about all Science is propaganda.
How often do we hear scientists state that they really cant confirm why a nasty ecological event is happening?
Not often.
Thats because each cause and effect in nature can now be used as a tool to promote ones position or agenda.
Its like mother nature has been made into a hand puppet with a guy in a lab coat with his hand up her dress dictating what she would say if she could.
Meanwhile nothing ever actually gets accomplished because all the players on the field are too busy posing and securing funding for the next home game.

 

[PeterIMA]

Some of what Kalk stated:
"Tens of thousands of state officals seem powerless in steming the declining waterways or the fate of mantees staghorn corals or the introduction of non native pests.
Fire ants in the north , white band in the south, Red tide in the west and wild fires in the east are trashing your state far beyond anything seen in the Indo Islands. All of your states eco disasters can be traced to native floridians woofull disreguard for the environment.
Again I ask, where is the proof that our industry needs to be shut down?
I have plenty of evidence that your state needs to be."



Kalk, Those are all interesting points. I would put it in the category "Its not us it is someone else". I think blaming the live food fish trade (which you have already done) in PI made some sense. Blaming Florida for PI's problems would be inadmissible in a Philippine court of law.

As a scientist, I read many papers, go to numerous conferences, and live in the real world. The real world is run by politicians who do many things that may not agree with the best science. I disagree with your statement that "all science is propaganda".

My job with FWC is to conduct "habitat suitability modeling". Part of my motivation to do this was the devastation of the reefs that I saw in PI in 1986. A lot of fisheries management does not take habitat into account in the fishery models. That is now starting to change. Basically, I am against the use of cyanide and other factors that destroy habitat and reduce the carrying capacity of coastal and marine habitats to support marine life. It is difficult to separate the effects of habitat degredation from fishing mortality. But, we need to protect habitats if we expect to have healthy marine ecosystems and sustainable fisheries.

You are right to state that there are many things destroying coastal habitat in Florida including coastal pollution, water diversions, coastal development etc. Much of this is to serve a growing human population as baby boomers move to Florida. The Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC-a State of Florida department) has scientists who study corals reefs, mangroves, seagrass, manatees, sea turtles, right whales, do fisheries dependent and fisheries independent monitoring, underwater surveys, study diseases, red tide, map habitats and fish species distributions using GIS and remote sensing, and do other ecosystem-related research. So you are wrong to imply that Florida is negligent in studying these problems. Our law enforcement agents in turn take these data and enforce existing Florida laws. Our Commission is a leader in helping to create regulations and enforcing laws passed by the Legislature to support Ecosystem Management.

PS-I forgot to state that FWC is also responsible for terrestrial wildlife, freshwater fish and fisheries statewide, and are involved in a lot of other issues. Obviously, there are other departments/agencies managing water (6 water management districts), managing parks and reserves (Fla. Dept. of Environmental Protection-FDEP), and dealing with natural disasters such as oil spills (FDEP), hurricanes and wildfires (Fla. Dept. of Community Affairs). Agriculture, aquaculture and I believe fire ants are dealt with by the Florida Department of Agriculture.

Peter Rubec

 

[Kalkbreath]

Do you now feel that had you (back in 1986) been more concerned with the Florida reefs then the reefs in PI , that the sunshine state's coral might have had a chance?
I find it odd the the entire time Americans like you and Steve were devoting yourselves to the preservation of farr off reefs..........the reefs in your own country degraded far beyond your distant obsessions.
In fact the Philippine reefs have made a bit of a comeback, while here at home the oposite is true.
In the Philippines those reefs are for the most part being degraded by people trying to feed themselves.
Both in the water food fish collection and on the land farming is the bulk of the PI reef decline.
Are you really comparing what Florida has done to its ecosystems with natives trying to feed themselves?
Are you claiming Florida officials were helpless to curb the rising tide of human effects on the waterways?
Then why expect third world nations to be more competent?
Native joe cant afford fishing gear or even a net.(even with money few net are to be found)
so he fishes the oldfasion way , just like his father with a cheap squirt bottle.
The Florida Joe builds his vacation home on the water.
He connects his toilet to the public sewage system, he sprays his yard with insecticides weekly to keep his St. Augustine grass green and full.
Florida joe is board, so he builds giant theme parks so he and his friends can pass the time.........blah blah blah.

There is no comparison.
We let our own reefs die, while we foisted our twisted ideals on natives trying feed themselves.
And some still dont understand why we dont trust the same do gooders mentality today.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk,

REPLY-I did not live in the USA in 1986. I worked as a Research Scientist doing marine surveys and stock assessments on Redfish (Sebastes spp.) for the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (from 1981 to 1990). PS-I am a Canadian citizen and a permanent US resident. I have a perspective for both countries since I have worked in both countries as a Fisheries Research Scientist.

You are the one making the comparisons (between the USA and PI)
and criticizing how Florida manages its natural resources. I was responding to your false allegations and defending Florida Fish & Wildlife. Florida does an excellent job of monitoring, research, and management of its natural resources. In contrast, in the PI almost no monitoring of fisheries is conducted to collect the types of data needed to run models to support mangement of marine fisheries. I would like to know how ReefCheck plans to model data collected from their underwater surveys to support better managment of the MAF fishery.

I don't buy your allegations that the problems with cyanide in the Philippines are minor compared to other types of degredation (any more than I did with Dr. Hodgson). Cyanide is a big problem that due to the efforts of the trade and MAC is totally out of control. You can not justify it under any circumstances.

As far as comparisons between PI (an underdeveloped country) and the USA (developed country), they are of some interest to me since I deal with both places. You are right that management in the USA (in places like Florida and elsewhere) is not perfect. There are lessons to be learned from both countries concerning how to manage marine ecosystems.

One of my points (made in an earlier thread) is that conventional single-species fisheries modeling is innappropriate for managing multispecies coral reef communities. Habitat management using zoning (e.g., MPAs and TURFs) can be applied in the PI (and even in the USA). In fact, it may be easier to implement zoning in PI. My vision of what is needed is somewhat different than what I have heard so far from ReefCheck.

In any event, I believe that the only way to keep the aquarium trade on track is through cyanide testing. Voluntary paperwork tracked through the chain of custody (MAC system) does not work. As far as the USCRTF they can only deal with those things under their jurisdiction (USA proper and associated territories). NGOs (like MAC and ReefCheck) and other groups
can play a valuable role, but they are not the government in PI, Indonesia, or Vietnam. So whatever NGOs do, it has to be done with the support and authorization of governments. Even if federal agencies like BFAR support the MAC, the local municipalities also need to support them since that is now where most of the management authority presently exists in PI. Decentralized management of marine resources is the trend being implemented in other SE Asian countries as well.

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

Your painting of the fine job Florida officials have done, shows that you never were direct witness to the splendor their reefs and rivers were in the 1970s and before.
A shinning example for the Philippines to follow?
Thats kinda like a Planned Parent hood spokes person away over seas teaching islanders safe sex........while her own daughter at home in the USA,gets knocked up having been without parental supervision!
Why didnt we seem to care about our own reefs when it wasnt too late?

Your right about needing continued cyanide testing.
If we had world wide testing, it would show that only about ten percent of the 12 million pet fish fish currently being imported worldwide are tainted.
Exculpation would be a nice thing for our hobby.
Even more so when some scientists actually do a field test to determine how often the few trade fishermen who use cyanide to collect actually harm the habitat they fish.
Separating fact from fiction would have saved the Florida reefs as well.
Feel good approaches like "sanctuaries" and "wildlife preserves " are of little use when they lay at the end of a city sewage pipe.
Underwater signs reading:
"Dont touch the live coral or the Feces please" posted around the Marine parks might have been a good idea,
Had the water ever been clear enough for the divers and tourists to read.



:wink:

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk writes;
"Even more so when some scientists actually do a field test to determine how often the few trade fishermen who use cyanide to collect actually harm the habitat they fish."

Kalk,
Since there are only 800 or so hardcore cyanide fishers left collecting aquarium fishes in the Philippines, [ give or take hundreds in the calm weather season]....its not much of a problem to fix.
This thing has become way overblown in some respects and it wouldn't take much to end it...if reform entities were sincere.
The % of Philippine cyanide fishers are already diminishing in proportion thru skills transfer via social osmosis and will actually vanish without futher intervention eventually.
The damage will still be high on habitat if it takes another 15 years or so though.
Now, 800 could easily be trained in a year...but won't be as we all know as an issue that finite couldn't justify the gravy trains coming to feed off it..
Still, your post suggests that this is not a super duper multi million dollar problem anymore and I agree.
Steve
PS. Indo/Bali is another story

 

[PeterIMA]

Steve Robinson wrote:

"Kalk,
Since there are only 800 or so cyanide fishers left collecting aquarium fishes in the Philippines, [ give or take a few hundred in the calm weather season]....its not much of a problem to fix. "

Steve,
A couple of months ago you stated that you believed there were about 1300 marine aquarium fish collectors in PI. How is it that you now come up with 800? What basis do you have for estimating the number of fish collectors in PI? Why has your estimate changed?

Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

Since there are only 800 or so hardcore cyanide fishers left collecting aquarium fishes in the Philippines, give or take hundreds more in the calm weather season....its not much of a problem to fix...

As we know, the numbers fluctuate in the easy time when the weather is calm [ like in Hawaii ]...but as our own cohorts on the ground reveal, the issue is slowly solving itself as local attitudes change and one municipality after another becomes less tolerant of destructive fishing.
Steve

PS.
Naming names of chorts however on a board as this is not something that makes sense, especially if you want to keep the information flow going...

 

[Kalkbreath]

We have had the discussion before.
What we do know is a ruff estimate of how many boxes of fish are comming out of PI per week, its been estimated that 5.5 million fish land in the USA. We can use boxes or fish count to estimate how many divers.
Boxes:
About 1200 in LAX and a few hundred in other ports of entry through out the usa.
Europe and Japan? Im no to sure , let say a few hundred.
With about 100 fish per box thats about 20,000 fish. (that 10 million per year)
How many collectors does it take to collect ten million fish ?
A few boxes per diver, like five or so would suggest that 400 collectors could collect that.(ten million)
Half are damsels and half gobies and other mixed fish.
Whats the collectors take on 250 damsels and 250 mixed lot?
Fish wholesale for about one dollar FOB. with damsels about 20cents.
that works out to 290 bucks split between collectors brokers and exporter.
Divers might get 20 % of that pie. a few pennies per damsel and 20cents per fish?
fifty bucks per week?
Can a collectors survive on fifty bucks a week in PI?
I get 400 collectors or less. What say you?

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
If you control the figures, you can make them fit any equation.
And if you regard this in US dollars and think in US values....you can make US sense.

$50.00 a week you ask? Can a collector survive on $50.00 US a week?
Since that is roughly what most of them make...the answer is yes.
[Heck...Macs best local field trainer ever only got paid $85.00 a week! Which is why he quit ]

The better ones and the ones becoming their own middlemen...more of course.

There is a shifting set of parameters that become obsolete by the time the scientific community catches up to them. This is because scientists go by verifiable...and yet often outdated facts.
By the time they catch up to the numbers they go by, the reality has changed again.
By the time the baseline has shifted, they have failed to catch up to it as they are focused on the previous shift.
Case in point; The reality in the past 10 years and even 5...has seen many changes for the better as the race continues to the bitter end.
Repeat....the reefs are being decimated at a slower rate per fisher unit.
This is still not the good news you seek.

The biggest collecting depot of all time, Pagbilao Quezon is done.
It... in its heyday alone had 800 cyanide fishers.
The long range boats have met with resistance in so many areas due to cultural eco-creep....[ ie. slow motion absorption of eco attitudes from the press, the school cirriculum and the increasing pressure from legal authorities] that they drifted into other things.
Local...ie. non foreign reasons are the ones that stick the best in a community and when the community is ready like Bolinao or Aparri in the far North...or Lubang Island or Legaspi City in Bicol...they go clean.
When the 'cool' mayor puts out the word to the police and the barangay captains that the tolerance for cyanide fishing has ended...it begins to end.
When he refuses to issue permits to collect and transport based on the word on the street....cyanide fishers can get shut out of their own long damaged system...and community.
Foreign groups can and should help....but life evolves regardless and frankly, the best success stories are the home grown Filipino ones now. Besides, many foreign initiatives go where its convenient for them and not here the real action is.
Supporting and assisting local effort gets the fishers where they sleep and becomes real.
The 40 or so significant collecting depots in the country are known....the divers are all known as well....the problem is finite.

Kalk....since you like to work with calculators...add this up;
800 cyanide fishers killing 40 significant coral a day...
times 240 working days a year is how many significant coral heads?
Add to it, 400 seasonals...
killing 30 coral heads a day...
150 days a year....
Now...add it up to just 3 years... and then 5 years....
Hail victory for the numbers?
Steve

 

[Reef Check Scientist Phil]

Hi to all,

It has been heartening to get some positive comments from this forum about our work in Reef Check. I am including some preliminary results of MAQTRAC surveys we have done so far for those who are interested. This is just one of the areas that Reef Check has done some work on top of those in Indonesia.

This is just a section of an Area Profile that we have been preparing for each area. An Area Profile basically is a baseline study of an area. It covers a description of the area, status of coastal habitats and fisheries, socio-economic situation, the marine ornamental business, management initiatives and recommendations among others. The Reef Check section is still evolving but basically covers the Fisheries Management Report. The Area Profile will be the basis of the Collection Area Management Plan to be drafted by a local management commitee and the collectors.

The Area Profile is then fedback to the ornamental collectors in the area and the other local stakeholders (such as local government officials) for validation and discussion.

(The figures have been lost in pasting the file somehow.)



V. PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE MAQTRAC UNDERWATER SURVEYS IN NEW BUSUANGA, PALAWAN


A. Summary of Results


Total Coral Reef Area 15,661,056 m2
Catch limits set for fish species 208 species
Catch limits for invertebrate species 18 species/groups
Live Hard Coral Cover over the whole survey 38% (fair)
Number of species requiring close monitoring in catch records and in future surveys 15 fish species


B. Methods used to collect the data


The Marine Aquarium Trade Coral Reef Monitoring Protocol or MAQTRAC has been designed by Reef Check in partnership with the Marine Aquarium Council as a protocol to monitor coral reefs. It is also one of the tools in the management of the aquarium trade consistent with the principles of sustainable use.

The main objectives of MAQTRAC are:

1. to describe the stocks (e.g. abundance and size classes) of ornamental fish and invertebrates in the area;
2. to provide a scientific basis for collection limits (e.g. total allowable catch or TAC);
3. to measure over-all coral reef health;
4. to determine the impact of local collection; and
5. to recommend sites for no-take zones.


Manta tow surveys (large scale coral reef health survey)

Manta tows were conducted across the reef front of New Busuanga to determine coral reef condition over a large spatial scale. The manta tow survey involves towing the diver in snorkel in a slow boat speed. The diver records the per cent live hard coral cover (in categories) along the tow track usually following the edge of the reef’s crest. A single tow last about 3 minutes and covers around 150 m of reef front. Habitats and their spatial extent are also mapped during these tows. The latter data are important in determining the location of detailed underwater surveys.


Site Selection (for detailed underwater surveys)

Sites were identified before the actual surveys based on their degree of exposure and reef type. These initial sites identified are later verified during the manta tow surveys. The collectors also identified their traditional sites during initial interviews in the community workshop, that guided the survey scientists in the location of underwater surveys.

There was a need for a site sub-sampling routine since the linear extent of New Busuanga’s reef front was too long for the a two- week MAQTRAC survey. In the sub-sampling routine, a total number of 16 collection sites identified representing a wide range of habitats. There are no-take marine protected areas in New Busuanga. Therefore, surveys could not be conducted in no-collection sites.

Some of the reefs were also inaccessible to survey. For instance, surveys were not allowed within a large area in mid- to southern San Isidro Island because it is within a concession of a pearl farm. The whole western section of Black Island was inaccessible due to strong wave action that prevented the surveys.


Timed swim surveys (ornamental and reef health fish indicators)

Timed swims are stop-and-start surveys each covering 500 m2 of reef area. This survey protocol has been developed for mainly recording ornamental fish species and reef health fish indicators’ abundances. These surveys are conducted across the major coral reef zones (reef slope, crest and flat) and seagrass and algal beds. The per cent live hard coral cover (using categories during the manta tow surveys) is also estimated in each timed swim.

Three timed swims were conducted in each coral reef zone and in seagrass and algal beds in each of the identified site. All of the marine aquarium target fish both currently and potentially traded were counted and their sizes estimated in these detailed surveys. In addition, coral reef health fish indicators (Reef Check plus surgeonfishes, rabbitfishes and fusiliers) were also recorded.


Belt transect surveys (ornamental and reef health invertebrate indicators and coral cover)

Belt transect surveys involve deploying a transect line across the reef bottom. It is a ‘belt’ survey because an area is covered using the line as a ‘ruler’ guide. The line is laid parallel to the shore and is meant to survey a uniform habitat (usually of the same depth). In reefs that form spur-and-grooves, the transect line is laid following the reef as long as the widths along the line don’t overlap. If not, then the line is laid across the spurs-and-grooves.

The transect line is 100 m in length, 5 m in width (2.5 m on each side) and 2.5 m in height. It is divided into 4 segments: 0 – 20 m, 25 – 25 m, 50 – 70 m, and 75 – 95 m. These segments function as statistical replicates in later analyses.

Belt transect surveys were undertaken to survey the abundance of ornamental invertebrates and of reef health invertebrate indicators in two depths (< 5 m and 10-15 m) in each site. Detailed site coral reef health is determined from the reef substrate cover data of points systematically sampled along the line.


Calculating Total Stock Abundances

The abundances of ornamental stocks in an area were estimated based on average densities, standard deviation, 95% confidence interval and the coral reef area. The coral reef area was estimated from satellite maps and available navigational maps.


Locations of Potential No-Take Zones

Potential no-take zones were identified and recommended based on the high density of ornamental targets, live hard coral cover and the practicality of monitoring and enforcement (e.g. presence of a nearby settlement). Several potential no-take zones are identified as options.


C. Preliminary MAQTRAC Results


1.) The MAQTRAC underwater surveys recorded over 26,000 individuals belonging to 208 ornamental fish species within the waters of barangay New Busuanga.

Approximately 19 species/species groups of ornamental invertebrates were also recorded during the MAQTRAC underwater surveys

2.) The manta tow surveys indicated kilometer scale variabilities in hard coral cover. Live hard coral cover categories ranged from 1 to 4. However, these variabilities were not large. Categories did not change dramatically in adjacent reefs.

3.) The large scale live coral survey indicated an average of 2.3 in the category. This translates to around 30% live hard coral cover in the whole reef of New Busuanga. This means that the coral cover or health is considered fair. (0 to 25%= poor; 26 to 50% = fair; 51 to 75% = good; 76 to 100% = excellent). The information of live hard coral cover distribution across the New Busuanga reefs.

4.) The fine-scale substrate surveys in the 16 sites also indicated variability in the distribution of live hard coral cover. Live hard coral cover ranged from 9 to 61% with an average of 38%.

5.) The live hard coral cover estimates from the detailed surveys (point sampling technique) was highly similar to the data derived from the large scale surveys (manta tow technique), average of 38% versus 30%.

6.) Tagisi Reef had the highest live hard coral cover (61%) while Black Rock had the lowest cover (9%). Live hard coral cover categories ranged from 1 to 4. The reefs of Black Rock have been the sites of destructive fishing methods (e.g. trawling that scrape the reef substratum) to account for its low cover. Corollarily, some of the sites with relative protection had higher live coral cover. The latter include the reefs in San Isidro (in the vicinity of a pearl farm), and Panlalaitan and Bacbac (local monitoring)

7.) There are no no-take marine protected areas in New Busuanga. However, the community is in the process of establishing one in the vicinity of Kabilbil reefs. This is one of the sites with high ornamental fish densities.

8.) There is a need to expand no-take marine protected areas. We recommend San Isidro I as a site for expansion. The reef in this site is both high in densities of invertebrate and fish ornamentals. Enforcement is also practical given it is in the vicinity of a pearl farm. We also recommend the reefs of Panlalaitan as another expansion site given its high fish ornamental density and local enforcement banning destructive fishing methods.

Conclusion:

What we have noticed so far is that local stakeholders including collectors and government officials have been receptive of our management recommendations. Of course, recommendations are discussed among collectors and other villagers with the area managers and community organizers to promote collaboration towards managing the local ornamental trade.

Yours,

Domingo Ochavillo
Reef Check Scientist

 

[Kalkbreath]

What are we comparing the current coral coverage data to?
Are we looking to find 100% coral coverage?
How many reefs world wide have 80 to 100% coral coverage over a 15,000 kilometer area? How many have ever had 80% coral coverage over such a large area?
One would expect considerable sand zones between reef patches.
100% coral coverage on the reef and an adjacent sand zone of equal size would average 50% coral coverage over the area.... Mix fifty percent soft corals on the reef and the hard coral coverage would average a misrepresented 25% for the entire area. There can be corals growing on every available square inch of substrate and still have an average of 25 to 50% depending how much of the area is too deep or too sandy for corals to take hold.

Is 36 % coral cover the natural state for these areas?
For instance , many areas of Fiji naturaly have limited hard coral coverage and always have.(well recorded time anyway)
What about soft coral and sponge in the area you surveyed?
an area can be quite healthy and still be devoid of hard coral.
One could better guage the effects of cyanide fishing if both soft and hard coral was measured.
An area teeming with soft coral life would represent an area not poisoned recently.
How would we know if an area naturally didnt support much hard corals, (like the gulf side or Fla keys)
and an area which was hard coral twenty years ago, but now is nutrient rich (run off)and covered with soft corals and Octocorals
It Seems difficult to interpret the data.
Whats the yardstick?

 

[Kalkbreath]

Kalk....since you like to work with calculators...add this up;
800 cyanide fishers killing 40 significant coral a day...
times 240 working days a year is how many significant coral heads?
Add to it, 400 seasonals...
killing 30 coral heads a day...
150 days a year....
Now...add it up to just 3 years... and then 5 years....
Hail victory for the numbers?
Steve

Steve if collectors were tourching coral in the manor you suggest, why hasnt anyone been able to photograph the handy work?
With thousands of bleached white coral head a day , it would seem to reason that many a green peace diver would have captured these thousands of isolated flocked white coral colonies.
Sure they come back with posed images of masked divers holding squirt bottles.......and entire reefs devoid of life.
but never the crimes themselves in the manor you suggest?
Seems fishy.

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, I have in my possession numerous images of corals were torched with cyanide. James Cervino visited both PI and Papual New Guinea. He interviewed cyanide fishermen and photographed reefs that the fishers admitted having sprayed with cyanide. On larger coral heads one can see the white path created by the cyanide plume. Unfortunately, the images are at too high a resolution (too big a file size) for me to post them on RDO. The research by Dr. Cervino (both in the lab and the field) confirms earlier observations by Steve Robinson and myself based on interviews with collectors in the mid 1980s.

So, don't say that the evidence does not exist.

Peter Rubec

 

[clarionreef]

Kalk,
The activists you suggest that would have or should have done some field work is noted.
Likewise, the orgs appealling for funding to solve the trades big problems might also be expected to do more than just interview people at trade shows and look for justification in the work of others based on the work of others based on the work of others...etc. etc....based on the work of others.
Understandably the trade had no interest in revealing much about its own little Watergate...and the desk-bound work of the new eco-reformer is hardly the type to reveal much rather then cite others who cited others rather then get their buts in the water with some decent camera gear.
Observing the paucity of good field work however, doesn't mean that its not there to be done....it just means that its easier to work at a computer these days.
Still...there has been some work on this by competents such as James Cervino.
If it were up to me...
I would spend a quiet month with real cyanide fishers and provide you with more then you'd care to see. I already lived it for a few years in cyanide collectors villages and I know well what I saw daily armed with a 24 dollar camera .
The least respected, and for me best testimony of the effects come from talking with commercial divers all day long and hearing their experience with the effects of cyanide use on corals. Perhaps the window has closed to see the real thing in most places as it is illegal.
I photographed cyanide being loaded in the boat and used by friends and revealed it all in FAMA articles back in 1983.
They were threatened over it by their Manila exporter. Then I was.
Still, I am actually surprised that so liittle has followed my observations.
I guess it was not exactly glamorous work and certainly not compensated work.
Steve
ex-contributing editor of FAMA magazine 1982-1992