Contribution of a large no-take zone to the management of vulnerable reef fishes in the south-west Indian Ocean

Published source details Maggs J.Q., Mann B.Q. & Cowley P.D. (2013) Contribution of a large no-take zone to the management of vulnerable reef fishes in the south-west Indian Ocean. Fisheries Research, 144, 38-47.
Share Tweet Email

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Cease or prohibit line fishing Action Link
	Control human activity in a marine protected area with a zonation system of restrictions Action Link
	Cease or prohibit spearfishing Action Link

Cease or prohibit line fishing

A site comparison study in 2006–2011 of four coral reef sites in a marine protected area in the Indian Ocean, South Africa (Maggs et al. 2013) found that two to seven years after closing a zone to offshore line fishing and all other vessel-based fishing (including spearfishing), there was a higher abundance and larger size of four coral reef fish species, compared to two adjacent zones where boat-based line and spear fishing was permitted. For all years, individual catch rates of four of four species were higher inside the zone closed to line fishing and other vessel-based fishing than in the zone permitting offshore line and spear fishing: slinger Chrysoblephus puniceus (3.1 vs 0.8 fish/angler/h), Scotsman Polysteganus praeorbitalis (1.2 vs 0.3 fish/angler/h), poenskop Cymatoceps nasutus (0.4 vs 0.2 fish/angler/h) and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus (0.6 vs 0.1 fish/angler/h); and average lengths were higher (slinger: 293 vs 240, Scotsman: 415 vs 359, poenskop: 417 vs 380, rockcod: 495 vs 435 mm). The Pondoland Marine Protected Area (800 km²) was designated in 2004 and has a central ‘no-take area’ (400 km²) closed to all offshore (vessel based) exploitation and two adjacent controlled fishing areas where offshore line fishing and spearfishing are permitted. No commercial fishing, such as trawling or long-lining, is permitted anywhere in the protected area. From April 2006 to June 2011, quarterly research angling was conducted at two sites in the no-take zone and two in the nearby exploited zone (6 h angling in each zone) at 10–30 m depth. Data were analysed for four species depleted by line fishing.

(Summarised by: Leo Clarke)
Control human activity in a marine protected area with a zonation system of restrictions

A site comparison study in 2006–2011 of two coral reef areas in a zoned marine protected area in the Indian Ocean, South Africa (Maggs et al. 2013, same experimental set-up as Maggs et al. 2013) found higher abundance and larger size of four of four coral reef fish species in a ‘no-take’ zone where almost all fishing is prohibited, compared to an adjacent zone with fewer fishing restrictions, two to seven years after protection. In each year, individual catch rates were higher inside the no-take zone than the fished zone for all four species: slinger Chrysoblephus puniceus (3.1 vs 0.8 fish/angler/h), Scotsman Polysteganus praeorbitalis (1.2 vs 0.3 fish/angler/h), poenskop Cymatoceps nasutus (0.4 vs 0.2 fish/angler/h) and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus (0.6 vs 0.1 fish/angler/h). Average lengths were also higher (slinger: 293 vs 240, Scotsman: 415 vs 359, poenskop: 417 vs 380, rockcod: 495 vs 435 mm). In addition, three of the four species (slinger, Scotsman, rockcod) showed increases in size over time (data not tested statistically). The Pondoland Marine Protected Area (800 km²) was designated in 2004 and comprises a central ‘no-take area’ (400 km²) closed to all offshore (vessel based) exploitation. On either side of the no-take zone are two controlled fishing areas where offshore line fishing and spearfishing are permitted. No commercial fishing, such as trawling or long-lining, is permitted anywhere in the protected area. From April 2006 to June 2011 quarterly research angling was conducted at two sites in the no-take zone and two in the nearby exploited zone (6 h angling in each zone) at 10–30 m depth. Data were analysed for four species that had been depleted by line fishing.

(Summarised by: Leo Clarke)
Cease or prohibit spearfishing

A site comparison study in 2006–2011 of four coral reef sites in a marine protected area in the Indian Ocean, South Africa (Maggs et al. 2013) found higher abundance and larger size of four coral reef fish species in a zone closed to offshore (vessel-based) spearfishing and all other vessel-based fishing, compared to edge zones where only offshore spear and line fishing is permitted. Individual catch rates were higher inside the no-take zone than the fished zone for all four species in each year: slinger Chrysoblephus puniceus (3.1 vs 0.8 fish/angler/h), Scotsman Polysteganus praeorbitalis (1.2 vs 0.3 fish/angler/h), poenskop Cymatoceps nasutus (0.4 vs 0.2 fish/angler/h) and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus (0.6 vs 0.1 fish/angler/h), and average lengths were also higher (slinger: 293 vs 240, Scotsman: 415 vs 359, poenskop: 417 vs 380, rockcod: 495 vs 435 mm). In addition, three of the four species (slinger, Scotsman, rockcod) showed increases in size over time (data not tested statistically). The Pondoland Marine Protected Area (800 km²) was designated in 2004 and comprises a central ‘no-take area’ (400 km²) closed to all offshore (vessel based) exploitation. On either side of the no-take zone are two controlled fishing areas where offshore line fishing and spearfishing are permitted. No commercial fishing, such as trawling or long-lining, is permitted anywhere in the protected area. From April 2006 to June 2011, quarterly research angling was conducted at two sites in the no-take zone and two in the nearby exploited zone (6 h angling in each zone) at 10–30 m depth. Data were analysed for four species depleted by line fishing.

(Summarised by: Leo Clarke)