Study

Conservation and community benefits from traditional coral reef management at Ahus Island, Papua New Guinea

  • Published source details Cinner J.E., Marnane M.J. & MCClanahan T.R. (2005) Conservation and community benefits from traditional coral reef management at Ahus Island, Papua New Guinea. Conservation Biology, 19, 1714-1723.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

Action Link
Coral Conservation
  1. Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

    A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2002 in six marine reef areas at Ahus and Onetta islands, Papua New Guinea (Cinner et al. 2005), found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar diversity and live coral cover compared to sites where fishing was unrestricted. Coral diversity and live coral cover were similar in protected, traditionally managed community (tambu) sites compared to unprotected sites (data as model outputs). Protected tambu sites had 60% higher fish biomass (205 kg/ha) compared to unprotected sites (127 kg/ha) and fewer fishing gear discards (data as models). Three traditionally managed (tambu) sites were compared to three sites of similar reef profile, current regimes, and wave exposure, which had no protective management or fishing restrictions. At each site, 10 m long transects (18/site) were positioned to cover the same aspect areas of reefs at 6 –8 m depth, and hard corals were identified to genus. Management and effectiveness were assessed via interviews and the recording of discarded fishing gear in transects. With 2–3 exceptions/year to fish for ceremonial food at tambu sites, spear and net fishing were prohibited and harvesting of invertebrates was severely limited, but line fishing was unregulated. Tambu areas (six sites; total 33ha) represented 6% of the available fishing area.

    (Summarised by: Silviu Petrovan)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 22

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the Evidence Champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust