Long-term monitoring of habitats and reef fish found inside and outside the U.S. Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument: a comparative assessment
-
Published source details
Monaco M.E., Friedlander A.M., Caldow C., Hile S.D., Menza C. & Boulon R.H. (2009) Long-term monitoring of habitats and reef fish found inside and outside the U.S. Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument: a comparative assessment. Caribbean Journal of Science, 45, 338-347.
Published source details Monaco M.E., Friedlander A.M., Caldow C., Hile S.D., Menza C. & Boulon R.H. (2009) Long-term monitoring of habitats and reef fish found inside and outside the U.S. Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument: a comparative assessment. Caribbean Journal of Science, 45, 338-347.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit/limit recreational activities (including anchoring) Action Link |
 |
|
|
Cease or prohibit all fishing activity in a marine protected area with limited exceptions Action Link |
 |
|
|
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified) Action Link |
|
-
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit/limit recreational activities (including anchoring)
A replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2008 at two coral reef sites off St John, US Virgin Islands (Monaco et al. 2009) found that in protected areas where anchoring was prohibited and some fishing and collection was also prohibited, hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas compared to outside, and soft coral cover was higher in one area compared to outside but similar in a second. Hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas (4% and 4%) compared to the unprotected areas (15% and 8%) and soft coral cover was higher in the protected areas in one comparison (inside: 22%, outside: 13%) and similar in a second (inside: 12%, outside: 11%). In one case, coral cover declined in the protected area (2003: 7%, 2008: 3%), but declined more dramatically in the unprotected area (2003: 26%, 2008: 6%), and in a second case, cover in the protected area was 4% in 2003 and 2% in 2008, and in the unprotected area cover was 10% in 2003 and 6% in 2008 (results were not tested for statistical significance). Two protected areas were selected, one on the mid-shelf reef and one in a bay. Anchoring was prohibited, alongside fishing and collection of all species except the blue runner Caranx crysos. Sites in the protected areas (18–30 sites/year) and in adjacent unprotected areas (15–25 sites/year) were surveyed annually from 2003–2008. Coral cover was assessed at one location/site within a 15 m diameter area.
(Summarised by: William Morgan)
-
Cease or prohibit all fishing activity in a marine protected area with limited exceptions
A site comparison study in 2003–2008 of two reef areas in the Caribbean Sea, US Virgin Islands (Monaco et al. 2009) found that prohibiting almost all fishing except for bait within a marine protected area resulted in lower fish species richness and density and similar fish biomass compared to adjacent unprotected areas in the seven years after protection. Species richness and fish density was lower inside the protected area than outside (species richness: 24 vs 27 species/100 m2; density 229 vs 294 fish/100 m2) and biomass was similar (inside: 7,900, outside: 8,800 g/100 m2). The Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument was established in 2001 to extend the existing Virgin Islands National Park. In the study area, all extractive uses and boat anchoring were prohibited, except for a small area where bait fishing was permitted (no species or gears specified). Annually, in July 2003–2008, protected areas (18–20 sites/year) and fished areas (15–18 sites/year) were surveyed. Divers recorded fish number, length and species along 25 × 4 m belt transects. Biomass was estimated using average length for each size class.
(Summarised by: Khatija Alliji)
-
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)
A replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2008 at two coral reef sites off St John, US Virgin Islands (Monaco et al. 2009) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas compared to outside, and soft coral cover was higher in one of two protected areas compared to outside but similar in the other. Hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas (4% and 4%) compared to the unprotected areas (15% and 8%), and soft coral cover was higher in one comparison (protected: 22%, unprotected: 13%) and similar in a second (protected: 12%, unprotected: 11%). In one location, coral cover declined in the protected area (2003: 7%, 2008: 3%), but declined more dramatically in the unprotected area (2003: 26%, 2008: 6%). In the second location, cover in the protected area was 4% in 2003 and 2% in 2008, and in the unprotected area cover was 10% in 2003 and 6% in 2008 (results were not tested for statistical significance). Two protected areas were selected, one on the mid-shelf reef and one in a bay. In addition to fishing restrictions (apart from for blue runner Caranx crysos), anchoring was also prohibited in the protected areas. Sites in the protected areas (18–30 sites/year) and in adjacent unprotected areas (15–25 sites/year) were surveyed annually from 2003–2008. Coral cover was assessed at one location/site within a 15 m diameter area.
(Summarised by: William Morgan)
)_2023.JPG)
