Frontier Fiji Environmental Research Series

Transcription

1 Frontier Fiji Environmental Research Series TECHNICAL REPORT 2 An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji FRONTIER-FIJI 27

2 iii

3 Frontier Fiji Environmental Research Series TECHNICAL REPORT 2 An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji Part 1. Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau Part 2. Socio-Economic Research and Capacity Building Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds) Frontier-Fiji International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands Society for Environmental Exploration Gau 27 iv

4 v

5 Suggested Technical Paper Citation: Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji Suggested Section Citations: Grover, A., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Steer, M.D., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. 28 Ecological Assessment Of The Fringing Reefs Of Gau In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Cooper, D., Winton, D. and Siddig, S. 28. Holothurians Of Western Gau In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Moss, N. and Gillis, L.G. 28. Soft Coral Rapid Assessment Procedure (Scrap) In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Moss, N., Gillis, L.G. and Steer, M.D. 28. Seagrass Watch, Gau. ) In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Weaver, D.G. 28. Raising awareness of turtle conservation through environmental education. In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Cooper, D., Winton, D. and Siddig, S. 28. Artisinal Fishing Methods And Catch Composition In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The vi

6 Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp Moss, N. and Gillis, L.G. 28. Farming Practices in Western Gau In Frontier Fiji (28) Grover, A., Steer, M.D., Weaver, D.G., Moss, N., Owen, N., Hall, N. & Fanning E. (Eds). An Ecological Assessment of the Fringing Reefs of Gau, Fiji, Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Series Report 2, The Society for Environmental Exploration UK, International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji, pp The Environmental Research Report Series is published by: The Society for Environmental Exploration 5-52 Rivington Street, London, EC2A 3QP United Kingdom Tel: +44 () Fax: +44 () Web Page: ISSN (Print) ISSN X (Online) ISSN (CD-ROM) Frontier-Fiji 28 vii

7 Frontier-Fiji The Society for Environmental Exploration and International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands have been conducting collaborative research into environmental issues since 26 under the title of Frontier-Fiji. Frontier-Fiji conducts research into biological diversity and resource utilisation of both marine and coastal terrestrial environments. Fiji, located in the Pacific Islands is renowned for its biological and ecological diversity. The majority of this country is dependent in some way on its marine resources for protein. They have traditionally used management techniques to maintain these resources but are coming under increasing pressure from unsustainable exploitation. As a result, conservation and development work is of paramount importance in order to better protect and conserve those areas coming under increasing pressure. Frontier-Fiji conducts baseline marine surveys on the western island of Gau, Fiji s fifth largest island in an effort to provide biological and resource utilisation data for the preparation of sustainable management initiatives for the region. International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands (IOI-PI) IOI operates out of 25 countries where it produces research and policy-related publications dealing ocean governance and ocean science. IOI works to ensure the sustainability of the ocean as the source of life, and to uphold and expand the principle of the common heritage as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Society for Environmental Exploration (SEE) The Society is a non-profit making company limited by guarantee and was formed in The Society s objectives are to advance field research into environmental issues and implement practical projects contributing to the conservation of natural resources. Projects organised by The Society are joint initiatives developed in collaboration with national research agencies in cooperating countries. FOR MORE INFORMATION Frontier-Fiji c/o Qarani Post Office Gau, FIJI Tel/Fax: [email protected] Society for Environmental Exploration 5-52 Rivington Street London EC2A 3QP U.K Tel: +44 () Fax: +44 () [email protected] Internet: International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands University of South Pacific, Lower Campus, Laucala Bay Road, Suva, FIJI Tel: [email protected] viii

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is the culmination of the advice, co-operation, hard work and expertise of many people. In particular acknowledgements are due to the following: INTERNATIONAL OCEAN INSTITUTE PACIFIC ISLANDS FJM Host: Dr Joeli Veitayaki SOCIETY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLORATION (SEE) Managing Director: Operations Manager: Operations Manager: Research & Development Manager: Research & Development Manager: Research & Development Coordinator: Research & Development Officers: Mrs Eibleis Fanning Ms Keely Severn Mr Kirk Williams Ms Nisha Owen Dr Mark Steer Mr Dan Weaver Miss Anisha Grover Miss Jacqueline Caine Miss Tanja Murphy Miss Brittany Alexander Miss Natalie Hall Miss Elisabeth Wulffeld Miss Aude Caromel FFMRP STAFF Principal Investigator: Dr Carly Brooks (Dec 26 April 27) Principal Investigator: Mr David Cooper (April 27 Sept 27) Logistics Manager: Mr Harry Rousham Logistics Manager: Mr Nicholas Moss Research Officer: Miss Debbie Winton Research Officer: Miss Sara Siddiq Research Officer: Miss Lucy Gwen-Gillis Research Officer: Miss Caroline Johnson Dive Officer: Mr Alan Rees Dive Officer: Mr Paul Collins Conservation Apprentice: Miss Kelsie Lee Pettit Conservation Apprentice: Miss Sarah Waters Conservation Apprentice: Mr Daniel Henly Conservation Apprentice: Miss Claire Horseman Conservation Apprentice: Miss Sophie Donkin Conservation Apprentice: Miss Julie Watson Conservation Apprentice: Miss Lisa Southwood Conservation Apprentice: Miss Carrie Williams Photograph Credits: Frontier-Fiji, Helen Capell ix

9 FFMRP RESEARCH ASSISTANTS: RESEARCH ASSISTANTS Rachel Miller Emily Pinner Jessica Richards Jack McDill Liza Parry Nicholas Riley Elizabeth Barker Victoria Battel Hugo Maughan Frederic Lamb Tania Auger Richard Vockins George Gardner Catherine Sims Claire Horseman Rebecca Wood Victoria Jeffers Katherine Stride Stephanie Reading Kayleigh Walsh Robert McNeil Sam Tucker Paul Haddon Helen Capell Lucie Carrington Julie Watson Matthew Stamper Katharine Hind Jonathon Rabey Michael Horton Luke Bardaji David Holding Carrie Williams Lucy Magoolagan Maia Corbyn Mairi Fenton Lisa Southwood Sophie Donkin Megan Sclater Heather Dutton Katharine Beattie Ben Warren Charlotte Smith Archie Maitland Joseph Naud James Pascall-Smith Eleanor Jones Lucy Webb-Wilson Gregory Rigby Helen Capell Alex Wood Christopher Pawson James Stitt Samuel Alsford Carly Gee Joe Filby Andrew Reece Richard Puxty Vanessa Barber Lauren Beck Michael Kerridge Victoria Steele Victoria Battell Claire Levitt Alexandra Grant Jennifer Hedley Madeline Warnick Harriet Smith Kate Newman Charlotte Highmore Timothy Rogers Mea La Bella Will Jones Laura Jones Edward Hirst Lorna Moore Amy Nogowczy India Le Marinel Benjamin Heyse Stuart McCallum Debra Haylings Deborah Crockard Tomaso Lisca Gemma Cusick Michilla Wright Max Kellett Christopher Smith William Reid Aja Bohutinska Kayleigh Griffiths Gwilym Davies Elaine Boyd Laura Mudge Tim Biggs Matthew Ashman Micheal Colgrave Molly Spector Sarah Wilderspin Richard Goodacre Jack Mackain Bremner Robert Allan Laura Shimell Joshua Baldwin Tom Barrow Emily Hilton Charles Alexander Alison Nicholls Louise Kerry Carl Steadman Samuel Lees Caroline Halls Dane Turville Alexandra Cole Steve Minter Christopher Hallam Lucy Murray Andrew Sykes x

10 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2. INTRODUCTION PROJECT RATIONALE AND HISTORY3 2.2 THE REGIONAL CONTEXT THE STUDY SITE: GAU ISLAND SITE SUMMARY: GAU ISLAND, LOMAIVITI ARCHIPELAGO, FIJI BIOGEOGRAPHY CLIMATE LAND USE AND LIVELIHOODS POLITICS & GOVERNANCE REPORT AIMS 8 PART ONE: ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FRINGING REEFS OF GAU 9 3. BASELINE ECOLOGICAL SURVEY INTRODUCTION AIMS METHODOLOGY BOAT MARSHAL PHYSICAL SURVEYOR FISH SURVEYOR SUBSTRATE SURVEYOR ALGAE & INVERTEBRATES SURVEYOR USE OF NON-PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH ASSISTANTS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS SURVEY EFFORT BENTHIC COMPOSITION ALGAE HARD CORAL RECENTLY KILLED CORAL RUBBLE SOFT CORAL SAND SILT ROCK OTHER INVERTEBRATES ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECTS ON BENTHIC COVER FISH FISH ABUNDANCE AND DIVERSITY FISH BIOMASS GENERAL CONCLUSIONS SITE ANALYSES VIONE SITE DESCRIPTION 37 xi

11 5.1.2 SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SAWAIEKE SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH ALGAE DISCUSSION SOMOSOMO SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH ALGAE KEY FINDINGS FURTHER RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS NUKUYAWENI SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH DISCUSSION NAVIAVIA: FRONTIER-FIJI BASE CAMP SITE DESCRIPTION BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH DISCUSSION NAWAIKAMA SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH ALGAE DISCUSSION LEVUKA SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH DISCUSSION NADRODO/YADUA 58 xii

12 5.8.1 SITE DESCRIPTION BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH DISCUSSION NUKULOA SITE DESCRIPTION SOCIO-ECONOMICS BIOTA HARD CORALS FISH SEDIMENTATION INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS NAWAIKAMA LEVUKA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH HOLOTHURIANS OF WESTERN GAU AIM OBJECTIVES INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SOFT CORAL RAPID ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE (SCRAP) INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY PHYSICAL SURVEYOR SOFT CORAL SURVEYOR RESULTS DISCUSSION SEAGRASS WATCH, GAU INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS 76 PART 2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND CAPACITY BUILDING TURTLE CONSERVATION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION INTRODUCTION AIMS STUDY SITE METHODOLOGY RESULTS QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS 82 xiii

13 1.5.2 TURTLE WARDENS SCHOOL WORKSHOPS PROGRAMME FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS PROGRAMME FOR THE SECONDARY SCHOOL DISCUSSION ARTISINAL FISHING METHODS AND CATCH COMPOSITION AIM OBJECTIVES INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS FISHING TRIPS RESULTS SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS FISHING LOCATIONS SPECIES CAUGHT TIME SPENT FISHING GEAR AMOUNT OF CATCH WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CATCH CHANGES TO SIZE OF CATCH EFFECT OF THE MPAS AND THE FUTURE DISCUSSION FARMING PRACTICES IN WESTERN GAU INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION DISCUSSION SLASH AND BURN FERTILISERS CONCLUSION FUTURE WORK CONSERVATION, COMMUNITY AND THE CHIEF: A CASE STUDY OF COMMUNITY BASED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ABSTRACT DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS CONCLUDING REMARKS REFERENCES 15 xiv

14 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2.1 GAU ISLAND, FIJI 6 FIGURE 3.1 STANDARD TOPOGRAPHY OF A FRINGING REEF AND SURVEY DESIGN 13 FIGURE 3.2 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PHYSICAL SURVEYOR 15 FIGURE 3.3 PROTOCOL FOR THE FISH SURVEYOR 15 FIGURE 4.1 MEAN BENTHIC SUBSTRATE OF FRINGING REEFS BY DEPTH AND REGION 2 FIGURE 4.2 PERCENTAGE BENTHIC COVER OF SIX PREDOMINANT TYPES AT EACH DEPTH AT EACH SITE ON THE WESTERN COAST OF GAU. 21 FIGURE 4.3 MEAN PROPORTION OF ALGAL COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 22 FIGURE 4.4 MEAN PROPORTION OF HARD CORAL COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 23 FIGURE 4.5 MEAN PROPORTION OF RECENTLY KILLED CORAL COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 24 FIGURE 4.6 MEAN PROPORTION OF RUBBLE COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 25 FIGURE 4.7 MEAN PROPORTION OF SOFT CORAL COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 26 FIGURE 4.8 MEAN PROPORTION OF SAND COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 27 FIGURE 4.9 MEAN PROPORTION OF SAND COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 28 FIGURE 4.1 MEAN PROPORTION OF ROCK COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 29 FIGURE 4.11 MEAN PROPORTION OF OTHER INVERTEBRATE COVER PER TRANSECT BY WEST COAST REGION, GAU ISLAND, AT EACH DEPTH. 3 FIGURE 4.12 AREAS WITH HIGHER HUMAN POPULATIONS EXHIBIT LOWER HARD CORAL COVER AT 1-12 M 31 FIGURE 4.13 AREAS WITH HIGHER HUMAN POPULATIONS EXHIBIT HIGHER NON-CORAL INVERTEBRATE COVER AT DEPTHS OF 3-5 M 32 FIGURE 4.14 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF FISH PER TRANSECT AT SITES ON THE WESTERN COAST OF GAU. 33 FIGURE 4.15 AVERAGE DIVERSITY (VIA SHANNON INDEX) OF FISH PER TRANSECT AT SITES ON THE WESTERN COAST OF GAU. 33 FIGURE 4.16 MEAN BIOMASS OF REEF FISH BY LOCAL POPULATION SIZE 34 FIGURE 5.1 MEAN PERCENTAGE OF CORAL BY GENUS, SAWAIEKE 39 FIGURE 5.2 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN SAWAIEKE BY FAMILY 4 FIGURE 5.3 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN SAWAIEKE, BY FAMILY 4 FIGURE 5.4 MEAN PERCENTAGE OF HARD CORAL GENERA IN SOMOSOMO 43 FIGURE 5.5 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN SOMOSOMO, BY FAMILY. 44 FIGURE 5.6 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN SOMOSOMO, BY FAMILY. 44 FIGURE 5.7 PERCENTAGE COVERS OF HARD CORAL GENERA IN NUKUYAWENI. 47 FIGURE 5.8 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN NUKUYAWENI BY FAMILY. 48 FIGURE 5.9 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN NUKUYAWENI, BY FAMILY 48 FIGURE 5.1 PERCENTAGE COVER OF HARD CORAL GENERA IN NAVIAVIA 5 FIGURE 5.11 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN NAVIAVIA BY FAMILY 51 xv

15 FIGURE 5.12 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN NAVIAVIA, BY FAMILY 51 FIGURE 5.13 PERCENTAGE REPRESENTATION OF HARD CORAL GENERA IN NAWAIKAMA 53 FIGURE 5.14 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN NAWAIKAMA, BY FAMILY 54 FIGURE 5.15 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN NAWAIKAMA, BY FAMILY. 54 FIGURE 5.16 MEAN PERCENTAGE OF CORAL BY GENUS, LEVUKA 57 FIGURE 5.17 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN LEVUKA, BY FAMILY 57 FIGURE 5.18 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN LEVUKA, BY FAMILY 57 FIGURE 5.19 MEAN PERCENTAGE OF CORAL BY GENUS, NADRODRO/YADUA 59 FIGURE 5.2 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN NADORO, BY FAMILY 59 FIGURE 5.21 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN NADRODRO, BY FAMILY 6 FIGURE 5.22 AVERAGE ABUNDANCE OF REEF FISH IN NUKULOA, BY FAMILY 62 FIGURE 5.23 AVERAGE BIOMASS (IN GRAMS PER 5M3) OF REEF FISH IN NUKULOA, BY FAMILY 62 FIGURE 6.1 WIND DIRECTION AND PLACEMENT OF VILLAGES AROUND THE NAWAIKAMA PENINSULAR. 63 FIGURE 9.1 PERCENTAGE COVER OF SEAGRASS SPECIES AND ALGAE AT A SEAGRASS BED IN NAVIAVIA 74 FIGURE 9.2 AVERAGE SEAGRASS CANOPY HEIGHT AT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS ALONG THE SHORE. 75 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 3.1 FAMILIES OF FISH RECORDED ON A BASELINE SURVEY. 16 TABLE 3.2 SUBSTRATE TYPES AND THEIR SUBSEQUENT CATEGORIES. 16 TABLE 3.3 KEY INVERTEBRATE INDICATOR SPECIES 18 TABLE 4.1 SURVEY SITES AND EFFORT 19 TABLE 4.2 ESTIMATED POPULATION SIZE (NP) AT EACH STUDY SITE ON THE EASTERN COAST 31 TABLE 1.1 AIMS OF THE SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION PROJECT AND HOW THEY WERE TO BE ACHIEVED 81 TABLE 1.2 TOPICS AND GAMES CONDUCTED WITHIN A TYPICAL WORKSHOP WITH PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN. 84 TABLE 1.3 ITINERARY FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL WORKSHOPS 85 TABLE 11.1 FISHING QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONS 88 LIST OF PLATES PLATE 1 COLONIES OF TABLE ACROPORA WHICH CHARACTERISE THE REEF IN SOMOSOMO 43 PLATE 2 SOME HOLOTHURIANS OF GAU 69 xvi

16 xvii

17 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Frontier-Fiji, is collaboration between the Society for Environmental Exploration (SEE), based in London, and the International Oceanic Institute Pacific Islands (IOI- PI), based in the University of the South Pacific (USP). SEE was invited to Gau in 26 to carry out baseline biodiversity surveys on the customary marine protected areas (qoliqoli) on behalf of the communities of the island to help them understand the status of the reef and inform the sustainable management of these resources. Fishers in the communities of Gau had observed a decline in catch per unit effort and in the size of the fish over the span of a generation. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were created directly in front of the 16 villages of Gau in which all fishing activities by the villagers are prohibited (tabu). These form part of a wider system of MPAs across Fiji aided by the Fiji Locally Managed Marine Area (FLMMA) network. More recently there has been increasing pressure to reopen the qoliqoli around Gau to commercial fishers. The primary role of Frontier-Fiji has been to conduct intensive baseline underwater visual census transects of the fringing reefs surrounding Gau, utilising the manpower of trained volunteers. Analysis on these results has helped us assess their condition and stressors. This information is then fed back to the communities in order to support the adaptive management of their marine resources. Additionally Frontier-Fiji has undertaken to provide teaching and training to better enable communities to make informed decisions regarding the management of their coastal ecosystems. As well as ecological surveys, socio-economic surveys on fisheries and agriculture have been carried out. Lomani Gau, which is the environment group formed by all the village representatives from the island has been involved in all of the workshops and have had decisive roles in planning particularly in the PADI-funded sea-turtle project where they had final say on the nature of community involvement and who should be involved in a way which was acceptable to them. The chiefs and the people are supportive of the initiatives. Overall, the health of the fringing reefs of Gau has been found to be good. High levels of hard coral cover were found in areas where there was a smaller coastal population, there is little evidence of slash and burn agriculture in the land close to the reefs, and where the majority of mangrove stands were intact. In addition, those areas which were sheltered from prevailing currents and wave action, exhibited higher levels of biodiversity. Reef fish abundance was also found to be good. However in areas which were heavily fished, small generalist families such as damselfish dominated the communities, with poor representation of larger herbivorous and piscivorous fish. The area with the poorest reef health was Nawaikama, as a result of the natural geography of the area which causes sediments to be trapped in Nawaikama bay, coupled with anthropogenic impacts of slash and burn agriculture nearby. Due to remoteness of Gau, problems of poorly planned, and rapid, development and expansion of commercial fisheries which plague much of Fiji do not affect the island to a great extent; therefore the majority of reefs are in good condition. But the subsistence fisheries still need to be managed carefully in order to ensure their sustainability. From the success of the turtle warden training programme, there is scope for further involvement of community members who could be trained in survey methodologies, biodiversity/ fisheries monitoring and ecology. This would ensure that

18 the residents of the island would be equipped to monitor their own marine resources without being dependent on external organisations. 2

19 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 PROJECT RATIONALE AND HISTORY The Society for Environmental Exploration (SEE) was formed in 1989 and is a nonprofit organisation limited by guarantee. The Society s objectives are to advance field research into environmental issues, and implement practical projects contributing to the conservation of natural resources and the development of rural communities in the developing world. Projects organised by The Society are joint initiatives developed in collaboration with national research agencies, academic institutions and government departments in co-operating countries. SEE has conducted research in Tanzania, Uganda, Mozambique, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Madagascar, Cambodia and most recently in Fiji, with particular emphasis on baseline biodiversity studies to aid future monitoring of areas both inside and outside of established and proposed protected areas. SEE s policy is to act as a conduit for local stakeholders concerns, opinions and knowledge. This has enabled SEE to establish management strategies that incorporate a human element into habitat conservation. While the preservation of biodiversity and habitats provides key ecosystem services on national and international levels, conservation can often have a negative effect at local levels, hindering the economic growth of rural populations and restricting access to natural resources. This may affect local stakeholders and therefore the cost of conservation at local levels needs to be minimised and mitigated. Frontier-Fiji was established in 26, at the invitation of the University of the South Pacific (USP) and the International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands (IOI-PI), to help the Lomani Gau assess, monitor and manage the marine resources of the Island of Gau. In 2, the communities in Vanuaso tikina approached Dr Veitayaki at USP as the fishers were noticing a decline in the local fish-stocks, fish sizes and deterioration in fishing grounds (Muhlig-Hoffman, 27, Veitayaki, 21, 25, 26). The district became a member of the Fiji Locally Managed Marine Area (FLMMA). In May 21, five tabu no-take areas were established by the villagers in Vanuaso, after village meetings and discussions to determine a suitable areas and sizes (Muhlig-Hoffman, 27). In addition, USP provided environmental training workshops for members of the community to conduct biological surveys and monitoring using early ReefCheck methodologies. A number of environmental community projects were also launched, which involved controlling and coordinating waste management, and building pig pens to control the livestock which was previously roaming free along the shore, reduce run-off, as well as protect and replant mangroves. Vanuoso district has extended its environmental management activities and was supported by the US s National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to rehabilitate their coastal habitats (Veitayaki et al., 25). In addition, support funds for the projects had been gained from French and Fijian Governments and the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), with training implemented by USP and IOI PI. Projects such as cattle farming (French government funding), bee keeping, giant clam reseeding and fish aggregation devices (Fiji Government funding) have all aimed to improve livelihoods on the island. USP and IOI-PI have also trained island communities in mangrove planting, environmental 3

20 education on the effects of pig farming along the coast, waste management within villages and how to construct coastal protection to prevent erosion and sedimentation (stone breakwater were constructed using rocks from the coastline). The success of the program in Vanuaso caught the interest of other districts on the island with these districts also looking for outside investment and help in enabling them to better manage their coastal resources. In December 25 all the villages on the island elected to combine their efforts and to form a committee, named Lomani Gau, roughly translated as Guardians of the Island. With this every village on the island set aside an area, generally directly in front of the village, as a Marine Protected Area (MPA) in which fishing activities were controlled and often prohibited. These reserves extend from the mean high tide line to the reef crest and vary in size and composition. The length of time the areas have been protected ranges from just a few months up to six years. Navukailagi tikina established its tabu areas with the aid of the USP s Institute of Applied Sciences (IAS) while Sawaieke and Somosomo villages worked with WWF-Fiji. Due to the lack of government involvement and finances directed towards environmental programs, work conducted by NGOs is critical in Fiji. The LMMA network is reliant on the help of outside organizations such as Frontier-Fiji to provide support, guidance, project design, monitoring, analysis and communication to communities in the adaptive management of their marine resources (Meo & Radikedike, 23). The biodiversity survey research conducted with the aid of volunteer Research Assistants contributes to the creation of a longitudinal dataset vital in the management plan process. Additionally Frontier-Fiji has undertaken to provide teaching and training to better enable communities to make informed decisions regarding the management of their coastal ecosystems. 2.2 THE REGIONAL CONTEXT The Fijian Islands, situated in the western Pacific, are primarily volcanic in origin, although a few are composed of limestone. The group consists of over 32 islands, 15 of which are inhabited, supporting a population of approximately.9 million (Haub & Kent 28). The population of Fiji is divided into two main ethnic groups, indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians. Indo-Fijians originated from India and arrived in Fiji over two centuries ago as indentured labour for the British, the rulers of Fiji at that time. There is also an ever-increasing Asian influence, mainly from Japan, which has occurred much more recently. Fiji s economy is supported by a strong tourism industry as well as sugar, agriculture and mining industries but has diverse export industries ranging from fish, sugar, gold, root crops, copra, vegetables and timber products (Watling 24). The population has an annual growth rate of.8% (Fiji Islands Bureau of Statistics 1999) and due to the small island nature of Fiji, much of the expansion and development is occurring along its coastlines. Only 19% of Fiji s landmass is suitable for agriculture (Nair, 23). Additionally, Fiji, like many other small developing nations, is beginning to show a demographic shift with an ever-increasing social drift of young adults to centralised urban areas. This has resulted in an older, more traditionally-minded demographic left in rural areas, especially on small islands, and has exacerbated urban coastline development (Pool et al. 26). 4

21 Traditional Fijian communities are rapidly embracing new technologies, in some cases with a loss of the traditional knowledge and systems (South et al. 24). Fiji has weak environmental management, policy and legislation. Although environmental policy and legislation do exist it is generally outdated, and poor implementation and regulation has resulted in limited adherence (Evans 26). As a result Fiji suffers from agricultural land degradation, waste management problems, industrial and urban pollution, forest conversion, and inadequate and vulnerable protected areas (Evans 26). Concerns over the degradation of the coral reefs of Fiji have led to a number of organisations, including the Fijian government, to seek answers to these problems. Some areas have reverted to traditional management techniques in partnership with science-based resource management approaches in order to prevent further degradation and even improve the marine resources upon which much of the population of Fiji is dependent (Matthews et al 1998, Cooke et al 2). Indigenous Fijians living outside of urban areas live in well-defined social units (Veitayaki 24) characterised by subsistence affluence (Fisk 197, Knapman 1987). Barter systems, reliant less on monetary exchange and more on exchange of goods or labour, prevail in these social units. Kerekere, a system of gaining things by begging for them from a member of one s own group (Capell 1991), is the method of bartering taken on trust by members of the social group. Family ties are also strong amongst Fijian communities with a high degree of responsibility towards other members of one s unit. 2.3 THE STUDY SITE: GAU ISLAND SITE SUMMARY: GAU ISLAND, LOMAI VITI ARCHIPELAGO, FIJI Location: 18 8' to S, ' to E Area: 3km 2 Maximum altitude: 738m asl Topographical maps: 1:5,, Reference (Q28/Q29) 1996 Frontier Fiji Base camp: Naviavia, S, E Ethnicity: Indigenous Fijians Livelihoods: Subsistence agriculture, commercial kava farms, artisanal fisheries (Source: Veitayaki, 26) The Island of Gau (pronounced Ngau ) is one of the Lomaiviti chain of islands and is situated 9km east of Fiji s capital Suva (Viti Levu Island). It is Fiji s fifth largest island after Vanua Levu, Viti Levu, Taveuni and Kadavu. The entire population of ca. 8 (no census has been taken) resides in sixteen villages and eleven settlements divided into three districts, or tikinas, each with their own district chief (Veitayaki 26). The chiefs and elders in Gau, are responsible for overseeing the wellbeing of the entire island. Vanuaso tikina comprises five villages, Navukailagi tikina, which is the smallest, comprises three villages and finally the Sawaieke tikina which covers almost two thirds of the island and consists of eight villages. Despite being Fiji s fifth largest island, supply routes are poor with inter island boats visiting the every 2-4 weeks. A weekly plane service provided by Air Fiji, can accommodate up to sixteen passengers. Owing to this lack of transport infrastructure, Gau is fairly remote with 5

22 little of the unregulated urban development and tourism which characterise other large Fijian islands. Figure 2.1 Gau Island, Fiji with key settlements marked, western barrier and fringing reefs are outlined and the large mangrove stands in Vione and Naviavia are shaded BIOGEOGRAPHY Gau is biogeographically diverse with dense cloud forest, highland and grassland habitats dominating the interior and mangroves and a complex reef system characterizing the coastline. On the western coast, a barrier reef runs parallel to the island, and between the coast and the barrier reef are fringing reefs and a sheltered deep lagoon (figure 2.1). The northern coast has extensive mangrove forests, which slopes gently into large mudflats and the reef is exposed to brisk oceanic currents but is sheltered from the south-eastern trade winds from May to October. Several river tributaries join the sea here on which the villages of Qarani and Navukailagi are situated. The windward eastern coast experiences greater rainfall than the western coast and as a result has numerous small rivers and tributaries, and the fringing reef network extending up to a kilometre from the coast. Much of the montane interior is virgin cloud forest, but has been increasingly subjected to poor land management and slash and burn agriculture. The forests are also home to the indigenous Kacau bird, the Fiji Petrel Pseudobulweria macgillvrayi. 6

23 2.3.3 CLIMATE Fiji and Gau experience a year round tropical maritime climate. Rainfall in Fiji is highly variable and influenced by island topography and the prevailing south-east trade winds. The mountains create wet climatic zones on windward sides and dry climatic zones on leeward sides. There is a distinct wet season from November to April where heavy, brief, local showers and thunderstorms in the afternoon are common. The dry season runs from May to October and is controlled by north and south movements of South Pacific Convergence Zone. The wettest month is March and the driest is July. Tropical cyclones affect the area from November to April. Typical daytime temperatures in Fiji range from 3-32 C and at night around 18-2 C throughout the year (Fiji Met Office, 28). The El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon and in particular the La Niña phase, have caused severe fluctuations in climate in 1998 and 2 resulting in widespread coral bleaching across the South Pacific region LAND USE AND LIVELIHOODS The population of Gau is comprised of indigenous Fijians living a traditional, semisubsistence lifestyle with agriculture and shifting cultivation being the mainstays with supporting artisanal fisheries. In recent years, the change in farming technologies and the indiscriminate use of slash and burn has resulted in increasing progression into the virgin forests of Gau. Fishing around the island of Gau is generally reserved only for Gau residents. Whilst it is visited regularly by larger fishing vessels from the capital, Suva, these vessels, unless owning a permit, must remain outside the barrier reef. The majority of fisheries operating within the waters of Gau are therefore of a small-scale subsistence nature with little of these catches being sold outside of Gau. Methods of capture include linefishing, gill-netting, beach seining and spear-fishing. Animals targeted include mangrove crabs, sea cucumbers, trochus, giant clams, sharks, reef fish plus small scale collection of edible seaweed. 2.4 POLITICS & GOVERNANCE Effective governance of marine resources, informed by locally appropriate scientific and socio-economic understanding, is the key to their sustainable use. Across the Indo-Pacific and Caribbean, wide scale political corruption and lack of recognition of indigenous land rights have led to unregulated coastal development and hindered the protection of coral reef ecosystems. These factors have been critical in exacerbating the poverty of coastal communities in developing countries which are reliant on reefbased resources. The political landscape of Fiji has been fraught in recent years, with numerous coups, the most recent one being in 26. Traditionally governed by indigenous Fijian chiefs, Fiji became a British colony in 1874 with the Deed of Cession. Under the Deed of Cession, all unclaimed land and lagoonal water became the property of the Crown. When Fiji was given independence, land tenureship became a complex process, with tribal lands being returned to their traditional owners, despite the presence of indentured Indian settlers. Today 8% of land is owned by indigenous Fijians and 7

24 2% is owned by the state. Offshore, a dual tenureship operates with traditional ownership of fishing grounds restored but the underlying seabed belonging to the State (Evans, 26). This makes management of marine resources a complex process. On this political backdrop, NGOs play an increasing role in aiding communities in the assessment of biodiversity, continual monitoring and guiding the management of natural resources. The Island of Gau practises a traditional form of governance, where the Paramount Chiefs and the Island Council, are responsible for the wellbeing of the island population. The Chiefs, along with the Council, make all decisions regarding marine resource use within the customary waters of the island. All marine areas within the fringing reef of the island are regarded as the property of the island. As a result of this any fishing within the customary waters is considered illegal without a licence granted by the local land owners and the Chiefs. The Chiefs allow no commercial fishing or fishing by non residents within the lagoonal waters, as the island communities are so heavily reliant on protein from the sea to supplement their diets. However, large commercial fishing vessels do visit the waters outside of the fringing reef, where there are no such restrictions. The introduction of either commercial or non subsistence fishing practise within the fringing reef would upset the careful balance that the island community have with the marine resources. However, concerns were raised by the communities and partner organisations, such as IOI PI and WWF Fiji, regarding fish stocks and the general reef health. 2.5 REPORT AIMS The 26 reports (Frontier-Fiji 27) documented three areas of concern, namely sedimentation, eutrophication and fishing pressure on invertebrates in Nawaikama and Levuka in particular. The 27 report has been divided into two sections; Part One is a detailed analysis the ecological survey work and scientific methodologies employed and Part Two discusses the socio-economic and capacity building work which Frontier-Fiji conducted. The results published here will continue to develop sustainable marine resource practice among the communities of Gau, and help to deliver strategic management decisions among the island community. 8

25 PART ONE ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FRINGING REEFS OF GAU 9

26

27 3. BASELINE ECOLOGICAL SURVEY 3.1 INTRODUCTION The importance of tropical coral reefs in terms of their high biodiversity and dependence of coastal communities on reef resources is well documented (Baird and Marshal, 22, Brown and Ogden, 1993, McManus, 1997, Nair, 23, Souter and Linden, 2). Tropical coral reefs are highly biodiverse ecosystems created by the deposition of calcium carbonate by reef-building sclerectianian corals, and are comparable to tropical rainforests in terms of productivity and complexity (Connell, 1978). Coral reefs account for less than 1% of the world s marine ecosystem, yet they provide food and shelter for up to 25% of all marine organisms. Therefore their continued survival is key to marine conservation and human resources use the world over. Coral reefs are found predominantly within the tropics, with coastal communities in many developing countries reliant upon reefs for income and protein (Gomez 1997). In many coastal areas of developing countries, virtually all animal protein consumed is extracted from reef fisheries. With many of these countries expected to double in human population size within the next 3 to 5 years (McManus 1997), the present resource pressure exerted on coral reefs in these areas can only increase. Without proper management or conservation activities many of these unique and diverse habitats will be lost for ever. As well as providing essential subsistence services to coastal communities, coral reefs can also provide additional economic input to nations through tourism-related activities (Souter & Linden 2). Tourism and its economic benefits have, in some instances, provided the impetus to initiate protective measures in developing countries, with the increased revenue actively supporting developing economies (Gomez 1997). Coral reefs are particularly sensitive to environmental change, operating efficiently within a narrow environmental band in which sea temperature plays an integral role (Brown & Ogden 1993). Reef-forming coral species (scleractinian corals) will only grow and reproduce when water temperature is within a range of C (Brown & Ogden 1993). Therefore coral reefs can become stressed easily if environmental conditions change for extended periods of time (Souter & Linden 2), which can lead to events such as coral bleaching (Hill et al 25). Initial studies in Gau in 26 (Brown et al,27) showed that there were certain processes on the western shore that were affecting the overall reef health. Processes such as sedimentation and eutrophication were the predominant areas where concern was raised, with over-fishing (predominantly for invertebrates at low tide) being of lesser concern. The 26 surveys (Brown et al. 27) highlighted that there was no correlation between algal cover and sedimentation (relating to light penetration); therefore an influx of nutrients must be the cause of higher algal cover in certain areas. Recent casual conversations with local communities have shown that there is very little or no fertiliser or pesticide use on Gau, and it was concluded that the influx of nutrients was more likely to come from untreated sewage and animal waste. Traditionally islanders 11

28 would use a pit toilet, which is covered over once full. However, with increased development on the island, flush toilets have now started to be installed. There is, however, no sewage treatment plant on the island and waste is pumped straight out into the ocean. Other causes of increased nutrient input could also come from the use of coastal areas to house pigs, with waste being washed into the sea by rainfall. This again has serious consequences for the reefs of the island and for the population who is so heavily reliant on marine resources for their subsistence and livelihood. With the lack of extensive commercial fishing on the island, one would assume that abundance and diversity of fish and invertebrates would be healthy. However, the 26 surveys (Brown et al. 27) noted that there are still some areas that are showing signs of high fishing pressure. Using fish abundances, diversity and trophic abundances and key invertebrate abundance and algal dominance as indicators of overfishing, it was determined that Nawaikama and Nukuloa were again areas for concern. This again was attributed to poor coastal management practices causing low fish diversity and biomass. 3.2 AIMS This report aims to build on previous research and further understand the complexities of the reefs of the western coast of Gau. This report will assess if temporal changes have occurred since surveys began in 26 in target areas identified in previous reports. Areas that were shown to be suffering from significant amounts of eutrophication, sedimentation and over-fishing will be specifically assessed and management strategies identified to mitigate such processes. Below are the specific aims of this report. Benthic assessment of all areas surveyed Assessment of fish abundance and biomass for all areas surveyed Assessment of hard coral coverage and diversity Site by site analysis identifying the key areas of concern 3.3 METHODOLOGY Data collection was conducted using a standardised Baseline Survey Protocol (BSP), based on international ReefCheck methodology, and has been developed over the past nineteen years of marine research by Frontier-Tanzania (Darwall et al 1997) and Frontier-Madagascar (Biddick et al, 26). This was then adapted to suit the habitats and conditions around the island of Gau (Brown et al,27). The BSP provides data on benthic cover, Underwater Visual Census (fish abundance and size data), hard coral data (genus and form), frequency of key invertebrates, algal cover as well as the physical and environmental characteristics. It allows many aspects of the marine environment to be documented and is used to ascertain whether there are any relationships within this most complex of systems (Biddick et al, 26). Levuka, Nadrodro and Nukuloa were only sampled on the fore reef during the 27 field season. Somosomo is also lacking results from the mid-range depth, and all the sites have fewer samples from this depth range. 12

29 REEF FLAT TRANSECT A -2M REEF CREST TRANSECT B 25-45M FORE REEF 1-3m -1 m 3-5m 6-8m 1-12m Figure 3.1: Standard topography of a fringing reef and survey design The Baseline Survey Protocol is a five-person survey technique which is carried out at the reef flat (-1m, 1-3m) reef crest (3-5m) and fore reef slope (6-8m and 1-12m) as illustrated above, using either SCUBA or snorkel. Dive times are limited to 4 minutes Surveys usually take approximately 2 minutes per transect, however, in complex areas with high coral cover and high fish abundance one transect could take up the whole 4 minutes. For safety reasons, snorkel surveys were only conducted at midrising and high tide to avoid contact with coral which can result in damage to the colonies and coral rash. Each member of the 5-person team has a specific task in recording data and maintaining high levels of safety BOAT MARSHAL The responsibility of the boat marshal is to collect surface data as well as acting as a safety marshal. The surface data collected includes: Cloud cover (octares) Wind direction and strength (1-5 scale) Turbidity (vertical visibility using Secchi discs) Surface temperature ( C) Boat traffic 13

30 This information enables the creation of physical maps of the areas surveyed in addition to looking at any correlations in data collected such as benthic coverage and prevailing winds and sedimentation. The boat marshal also keeps track of the diving surveyors location using the surface marker buoys carried by the divers. Dive flags warn any passing boat traffic of the divers presence. Time underwater for divers is kept to a maximum of 45 minutes which is monitored by the boat marshal; any overstay of this time results in an alert being raised and rescue divers put on standby PHYSICAL SURVEYOR This diver controls the safety of the dive in addition to the pace of the survey. Acting as a buddy for the fish surveyor they lay out the tape measure to 45 metres pausing at 2 metres for the second buddy pair to catch up and to check level of air consumption in all the divers on deep water surveys. At this interval period if any diver has less than 12bar the second survey is aborted and all divers return to the surface. If carrying out baseline snorkel surveys there is no need for this; however the physical diver continues to monitor the safety of divers during snorkel surveys. Survey teams were matched according to their air consumption rates to reduce the need to abort dives. The tape is laid out at a pace of roughly two metres per minute to allow the fish surveyor to record all the fish. Secondly they lay a chain to measure rugosity (complexity of the substratum) at 2m and 45m.The rugosity chain is laid over the coral along the transect line allowing the weight of the chain to fill in the contours of the reef, the length of the rugosity chain at the end of the ten meter transect will be measured to determine the rugosity value of the transect area. The length of the chain divided by the length of the transect yields the rugosity. Therefore if fifteen meters of chain lays out over a ten meter transect the rugosity is 1.5 for that segment and so on, the higher the number the more the vertical variation of the transect area. They record temperature and depth at intervals along the tape in addition to creating a small map of the area around the tape measure. Depth is recorded at, 2, 25 and 45m along the tape measure; temperature is recorded at and 25m along the tape, and rugosity at 2 and 45m along the tape. The survey is divided into replicate a (-2 m) and replicate b (25-45m) with a 5m buffer zone, thus constituting two replicate transects (see Figure 3.2 below). 14

31 Figure 3.2: Responsibilities of the physical surveyor FISH SURVEYOR This surveyor records every fish that enters into a 5m 3 imaginary box extending 2.5 m either side of the transect from -2m and from 25-45m along the tape, therefore surveying 5 m 3 of reef in each 2m transect (see fig 4.4 below). They record abundance in addition to size of each fish in 5cm increments. This allows calculation of abundances, biomass and biodiversity for each site. Figure 3.3 Protocol for the fish surveyor As diversity among Pacific coral reefs is high, it makes it impractical to census every species encountered; therefore target species and genera were identified for inclusion in the underwater visual census. This includes 141 species from 17 families and spans six trophic levels (table 3.1). Fish from other families are ignored as they are either not typical reef dwellers (pelagic visitors), cryptic, nocturnal, or of no commercial importance. (Mumby et al, 1995; English et al, 1994). 15

32 TROPHIC GROUP FAMILY (COMMON) FAMILY (SCIENTIFIC) Generalists/omnivores Angelfish Pomacentridae Damselfish Pomacentridae Butterflyfish Chaetodontidae Invertivores Goatfish Mullidae Sweetlips Haemulidae Triggerfish Balistidae Corallivores Parrotfish Scaridae Herbivores Rabbitfish Siganidae Surgeonfish Acanthuridae Piscivores Elasmobranchs Elasmobranchi Emperor Lethrinidae Grouper Serranidae Snapper Lutjanidae Trevally Carangidae Barracuda Sphyraenidae Planktivores Mackerel Scombridae Fusiliers Caesonidae Wrasse Labridae Table 3.1 Families of fish recorded on a baseline survey SUBSTRATE SURVEYOR Using the line intercept transect (LIT) method (Wilson et al 1997), this surveyor records everything lying directly under the tape measure and its length to the nearest centimetre. The percentage coverage of hard coral, soft coral, recently killed coral (RKC), rock, rubble, sand, silt, sponge and algae is calculated for each site. Additionally the surveyor is trained to identify hard coral and soft coral to genus level which allows a measure of biodiversity at sites to be taken. Survey staff are only trained to identify coral species to genus level as it is often difficult to tell species apart without taking samples and conducting microscopic examination. Morphology is recorded as branching, tabular, digitate, encrusting, massive, sub-massive, laminar, foliose or solitary in order to obtain a degree of complexity and exposure for each site. Benthic types recorded are listed in T able

33 SUBSTRATE TYPE Algae Hard Coral Rock Rubble Silt Other Invertebrate GENUS/CATEGORY Halimeda Padina Sargassum Button weed Green spp. Red spp. Brown spp. Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Pocillopora Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea >15 cm size <15cm size Fine sticky Anemone spp. Sponge spp. Recently Killed Coral Sand Seagrass Soft coral Table 3.2 Substrate types and their subsequent categories. For hard coral there are at present 25 coral genera used for identification purposes. 17

34 3.3.5 ALGAE & INVERTEBRATES SURVEYOR This surveyor acts as the buddy for the substrate surveyor. They follow a zigzag path behind the substrate surveyor recording abundances of key invertebrate indicator species (see table 3.3 below) and algal abundances. INVERTEBRATE COMMON NAMES Diadema sp. Tripneustes gratilla Collector urchin Phyllacanthus imperialis Pencil urchin Acanthastar planci Crown of thorns starfish class Echinidae Other urchin Panukirus sp. Edible lobster Stenopus hispidus Banded coral shrimp class Crustacea Other crustacean Stichopus chloronotus Greenfish sea cucumber Thelenota anamas Prickly redfish sea cucumber Tridacna sp. Giant clam Charonia tritonis Triton trumpet shell class Gastropoda Other gastropods Order Cerianthid, Coralliomorpharians Anemone & Zooanthidean Table 3.3 Key invertebrate indicator species recorded 3.4 USE OF NON-PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH ASSISTANTS Darwall & Dulvy (1996) showed that with adequate training, non specialist personnel can identify up to 5 species of fish and estimate fish size with 8% accuracy after only a few training dives and expert supervision. 3.5 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Individual data analyses are described, where necessary, in the results sections. To control for unequal sampling effort at different sites and at different depths, data are given as mean value per transect. However, much of the data is unsuited to large-scale statistical analysis. Any appropriate analyses were carried out using SPSS. 18

35 4. RESULTS 4.1 SURVEY EFFORT The data was collected over twelve months from January to December 27 over four research phases: Research Phase 71: 4 th January to 15 th March Research Phase 72: 2 nd April to 11 th June Research Phase 73: 2 nd July to 4 th September Research Phase 74: 4 th July to 12 th December During the 27 field season, Frontier-Fiji staff and research assistants surveyed a total of 588 transects in nine sites in a total survey area of 294,m 3. Vione, Nadrodro and Levuka were surveyed on satellite camps in 71, 72 and 73 respectively. VILLAGE SITE CODE 71* TOTAL Vione** VIO Qarani QAR Navukailagi NLG Sawaieke SWK Somosomo SOM Nukuyaweni NYW Naviavia NVV Nawaikama NWK Nukuloa NKL Levuka** LVK Vunuku VNK Lekanai LEK Vanuaso VAN Nacavanadi NAC Malawai&Lamiti MAL Waisomo WAI Yadua/ Nadrodro** NDO Vadravadra VDV Total Table 4.1 Sites surveyed and number of 2m transects per phase per site. *Much data for the 71 phase was lost in a storm and is not presented. **Due to the low sample sizes at Vione, Levuka and Yadua, these areas were not included in subsequent analyses BENTHIC COMPOSITION The benthic composition showed a good deal of variation at different sites and at different depths (figure 4.1) 19

36 Figure 4.1 Mean benthic substrate of fringing reefs by region and depth, Gau Island 2

37 1-1 m Silt Sand Rubble Rock Coral Algae 1SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3 m Silt Sand Rubble Rock Coral Algae 1SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8 m Silt Sand Rubble Rock Coral Algae 1SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12 m Silt Sand Rubble Rock Coral Algae SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.2 Percentage benthic cover of six predominant types at each depth at each site on the western coast of Gau. 21

38 4.2.1 ALGAE The majority of sites show a low level of algal cover (-1%) at all depths (figure 4.3). There is a general trend of increasing abundance moving from north to south along the western coast of the island. The results from the deepest survey at Levuka are very different to the majority of other sites, with algal cover averaging 42% m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.3 Mean proportion of algal cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 22

39 4.2.2 HARD CORAL The highest hard coral cover is found in the vicinity of Somosomo and Nukuyaweni (figure 4.4). Sawaieke and Nukuloa tend to show the lower coverage, which might be explained respectively by Sawaieke s more exposed location and Nukuloa having a substrate dominated by silt to which juvenile coral cannot attach and settle. The rest of the sites appear to have similar proportions of hard coral cover, so from it can be inferred that coral recruitment and growth are similar across the island of Gau m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.4 Mean proportion of hard coral cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 23

40 4.2.3 RECENTLY KILLED CORAL Recently killed coral (RKC) is the proportion of bleached coral. A few small patches of bleached coral were found mainly at Sawaieke and Nawaikama, but nowhere did the average percentage coverage exceed.4% (figure 4.5) m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.5 Mean proportion of recently killed coral cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 24

41 4.2.4 RUBBLE Rubble is a relatively common substrate at all sites, except Nukuloa (figure 4.6). There is no correlation with local population size (p =.75). A small, but significant negative correlation with latitude (p =.2, ρ = -.146) is likely to be predominantly due to the unusually low occurrence of rubble at Nukuloa m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.6 Mean proportion of rubble cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 25

42 4.3.5 SOFT CORAL Soft corals cover a small proportion of the benthos at each site, being more common in shallower waters (figure 4.7). 15-1m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage 1 5 SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.7 Mean proportion of soft coral cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 26

43 4.3.6 SAND There is a general decrease in the proportion of the benthos comprised by sand moving south along the coast. For most sites the mean percentage coverage is relatively high (1-2%), with more sand occurring at lower depths (figure 4.8) m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.8 Mean proportion of sand cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 27

44 4.3.7 SILT Silt cover is generally low along the east coast of Gau, except for high occurrences at Nukuloa and Levuka towards the south of the island (figure 4.9). It is important that more survey effort is targeted at these areas to fill in the gaps at shallow depths m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m 5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.9 Mean proportion of sand cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 28

45 4.3.8 ROCK Rocks make up a considerable proportion of the benthos at shallow depths (~2-5%), and less, but still considerable proportions at most deeper sites (~1-3%). Once again Levuka differs from the rest of the sites, showing no rock coverage (figure 4.1) 6 5-1m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.1 Mean proportion of rock cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 29

46 4.3.9 OTHER INVERTEBRATES Other invertebrates, such as sponges and anemones unsurprisingly contribute little as far as total percentage cover is concerned. Greater abundance of these organisms is generally found at deeper depths, especially at Nukuyaweni, Naviavia and Nawaikama (figure 4.11) m % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-3m 1.5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 6-8m 1.5 % Coverage SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK 1-12m 1.5 % Coverage 1.5 SWK SOM NYW NVV NWK NKL LVK Figure 4.11 Mean proportion of other invertebrate cover per transect by west coast region, Gau Island, at each depth. Regions are ordered north-south along the x-axis. Error bars represent one standard error from the mean. 3

47 4.4 ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECTS ON BENTHIC COVER It is possible that human pressure from both terrestrial and marine activities affects the benthic composition of coastal waters. We make the assumption that local population size will correlate strongly with the amount of human disturbance, and can therefore be used to investigate whether human impacts affect benthic composition. The percentage cover data for each of the substrates from every transect at each site and depth was correlated against an estimated local population (taken from socioeconomic surveys; table 4.2) using Spearman s rank correlations. Site N P SWK 3 SOM 15 NYW NVV 2 NWK 35 NKL 15 LVK 2 Table 4.2 Estimated population size (N P ) at each study site on the eastern coast To avoid biasing the results towards more heavily studied areas and depths, separate test were performed for each depth. Due to the large number of tests performed (n = 36), the resultant p-values were Bonferroni corrected. Two effects of population size were observed, hard corals at 1-12 m deep show a negative correlation with population size (p =.1, ρ = -.38; figure 4.12), whilst a greater population correlates with a higher percentage cover of invertebrates such as sponges and anemones at depths of 3-5 m (p =.12, ρ =.414; figure 4.13). Figure 4.12 Areas with higher human populations exhibit lower hard coral cover at 1-12 m 31

48 Figure 4.13 Areas with higher human populations exhibit higher non-coral invertebrate cover at depths of 3-5 m 4.5 FISH FISH ABUNDANCE AND DIVERSITY A total of 2418 fish of 138 different species were recorded during 27. For each transect, a measure of diversity was calculated using the Shannon Index. Differences between fish abundance and diversity sites were analysed using general linear models containing site and phase as fixed factors. Tukey tests were used, where appropriate, as post hoc tests. Sites which were only surveyed during one phase were excluded from the analyses. Abundance data were square root-transformed to normalise the residuals. A significant interaction between site and phase was observed for fish abundance (F 13,553 = 1.862, p =.32), whilst fish diversity showed significant differences between site (F 5,553 = , p =.) and phase (F 3,553 = 9.692, p =.), but no interaction (F 13,553 =.856, p =.6). Despite the significant interaction, the pattern of fish abundance across sites remains similar across phases. Somosomo and Nukuyaweni show the highest numbers of fish whilst Nukuloa, a site with high silt coverage, holds very few fish (figure 4.14). Similar patterns are evident for diversity (4.15) with Nukuloa exhibiting significantly lower diversity than all of the other sites. Fish diversity in the first phase of the year (71) was significantly higher than that of both phases 72 (p =.9) and 74 (p =.), whilst 74 also showed a significantly less diverse fish population than the previous phase, 73 (p =.1). There is a general trend of decreasing abundance and diversity moving away from Somosomo and Nukuyaweni. Increased sampling beyond the range of the current sites, especially to the north, would indicate whether this is a consistent trend. It is relevant that Somosomo and Nukuyaweni are the least populated regions of those studied. Across all the data both abundance and diversity show significant correlations with estimated local population (abundance: r = -.121, p =.3; diversity: r = -.151, p =.) 32

49 Figure 4.14 Average abundance of fish per transect at sites on the western coast of Gau. Sites are ordered north-south and error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals. Figure 4.15 Average diversity (via Shannon index) of fish per transect at sites on the western coast of Gau. Sites are ordered north-south and error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals. If increased population size is leading to increased fishing pressure on the local marine environment, it might be expected that some groups of fish, such as piscivores which are often targeted by fisherman, will be affected disproportionately. The diversity data were divided into groups based on the trophic group to which each 33

50 family belong (see table 3.1). The relative diversity of each group was calculated for each transect. Spearman s rank correlations were used to test relationships between the relative diversity of each group and the local population size. If a particular group was being targeted it would be expected to show a negative correlation with population, while groups which were not favoured by fishermen would show positive correlation. However, none of the groups showed any significant correlation, so there is no tangible evidence that any particular trophic groups are being particularly affected by fishing activities FISH BIOMASS Fish biomass is an indicator of productivity of the reef, and therefore is used in conjunction with the reef fish abundance. The biomass in grams (W) was calculated using length weight relationships published in Fishbase (28) following the formula: W = a.l b Where L is the length of fish and a and b are published values specific to each species (Fishbase, 28). During the BSP surveys, each fish was assigned to a length category of 5cm increments. The mid-value of this category was used in the calculation of biomass; therefore the value is an approximation of biomass. Biomass shows the similar patterns as abundance and diversity, including a general decrease correlated with local population size (figure 14.16; Spearman s rank correlation: ρ = -.277, p =.) Figure 4.16 Mean biomass of reef fish by local population size 34

51 4.6 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS There is a general trend of increasingly degraded reef habitat and decreasing fish abundance and biomass from north to south along the western coastline of Gau. These results tie in with field observations of decreasing coral and fish diversity and richness. From the report of the 26 field season and field observations from the 27 field season, Qarani, Vione, Sawaieke, Somosomo, Nukuyaweni and Naviavia may be grouped together in terms of their reef community structure and coral and fish abundance. Each site visited in the 27 field season has been reviewed in more detail in the next chapter of this report. Nukuloa offers the lowest fish and coral diversity coupled with high sedimentation. Levuka shows similar patterns, which supports field observations, but more data is needed from these areas to draw firm conclusions and to be able to reliably compare these sites to the others. A mangrove planting project in Nawaikama introduced Rhizophora spp. seedlings into the mud below the low tide line along the coastline where once mangroves existed but were removed over time. Many of these have grown to saplings and appear to have taken well. This region of Gau is also lacking in terms of fish and coral diversity, but supports many people, all needing to live off the reefs in this region. An action plan must be developed, addressing the high run off in this area, to reduce the impact of the large amount of pigs found on the shore, the runoff from farms, and direct sewage outlets from many of the houses. The finding of young coral colonies would suggest that the bay may recover if the water quality could be improved and as the findings of this report suggest, high coral coverage and diversity creates a diverse habitat to support greater fish life. Whilst it is commonly observed around the world that, in areas where coral reefs are fished, the abundance and diversity of piscivorous fish is especially badly affected, there is little evidence from the current data that piscivores are being fished any more intensely than other groups. However, caution must be applied to these results since they are based on the assumption that local population size correlates strongly with local fishing pressure. A more detailed comparison of fishing pressure, which can be determined through questionnaires and fishing trips, with the fish abundance data would enable discussion of reasons for differences in fish abundance between regions. Analysis of the fish abundance data should be extended to statistically comparing regions in order to examine the effect of fishing on the fish population an aim of the fishing questionnaire and fishing trips side-project. Care must be taken to ensure these areas are prevented from declining in terms of fish numbers. The local population is concerned with the falling catch numbers occurring during their lifetimes and the creation of these MPAs are evidence of this concern. MPAs are a step forward but more must be done to ensure that fish numbers remain high enough to sustain the local population, as well as remain viable for species survival. However, it is not yet known whether the MPAs are having a beneficial effect on the abundance and diversity of the reef biota as a whole. 35

52

53 5. SITE ANALYSES 5.1 VIONE SITE DESCRIPTION Vione is a small village situated at the northern most point of Gau island and was surveyed during one of the satellite camps in 71. Geologically, Vione s MPA and intertidal zone lies on an expanse of limestone rock. Extensive mangrove stands are present along the northern coastline of Gau. They trap much of the sediment evident in the river which flows through the village out to the sea; a thick anoxic mud surrounded mangrove the trees, but was not seen beyond this zone. Beyond the mangroves there is a shallow tidal zone which extends for a kilometre and comprises of a large seagrass meadow. Directly after the intertidal zone, the substrate becomes sandy, and as it is permanently covered in shallow water, small sparsely distributed coral colonies are able to grow. It is at this point that Vione s MPA starts. The sandy zone it is on a shallow slope towards the reef crest where it drops sharply into the fore reef wall. The fringing reef at Vione is not sheltered by the barrier reef which extends down the western coast of Gau, and is therefore directly exposed to oceanic currents and wave action. The tidal range in Vione restricted the possible research times, with only one window during highest high tide per day. Sampling took place at the reef crest where the tidal range had the least impact, and depth was constant. In addition to the BSP data, the mangrove stands and the MPA were mapped using GPS and data was collected for Seagrass Watch. Unfortunately, most data from Vione was destroyed in a tropical storm SOCIO-ECONOMICS Vione has one of the largest designated MPAs in Gau at around 2km 2 which extends from the sandy reef flat to the reef crest. The predominant livelihoods in Vione are subsistence farming in areas around the village and artisanal fisheries. The local population fish in the oceanic waters off the reef crest, which is not under the jurisdiction of the MPA. Villagers from Vione also claimed there was evidence that unlicensed fishers from other villages fished this MPA BIOTA HARD CORALS Hard coral was distributed sparsely atop of the limestone expanse, with low genus richness (n = 9). Acropora was the dominant genus of hard coral but submassive, encrusting and laminar forms of eight other coral genera were also found in small proportions. 37

54 FISH Vione exhibited high fish species richness, particularly at the 1-12m depth where 27 different species were found, the highest recorded in Gau in KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS According to field observations, clear water aided the visual fish census and the large numbers of fish made this place one of the most diverse and enjoyable sites to survey on the island of Gau. The colonies of hard coral found in the rocky zones were predominantly very small, this could represent new recruitment following the 1998 bleaching event, however further study in this region would be needed to confirm this. As the site is directly exposed to brisk oceanic currents, this could hinder the juvenile coral in adhering to the limestone substrate. Despite low substrate diversity, dominated by bare rock and low hard coral cover, fish diversity was high, particularly at the greater depths of 1-12m. This is unusual in reef community distribution as coral growth is light limited and the lower productivity at greater depths is reflected in the lower abundance of reef fish. Therefore this observation could be attributed to topographic complexity (high rugosity) of the rock substrate (perhaps with the presence of fissures or crevices) (Gratwicke and Speight, 25). The sheer drop of the fore reef with low coral cover (5.3%) would discourage the presence of smaller reef dwelling species but larger pelagic fish would likely congregate at the wall when current upwellings bring nutrients. As few transects were recorded in Vione, and much data was lost, it was not possible to include the data in the final statistical analysis. Therefore the key recommendation is the collection of further BSP data, perhaps on an extended satellite camp which should be coordinated to coincide with spring tides. 5.2 SAWAIEKE SITE DESCRIPTION Sawaieke is located in a large sweeping bay at the northern most tip of the western barrier reef and is protected by this structure from oceanic currents and wave action. There is a break in the barrier reef known as the Sawaieke passage. This site is typified by a large number of patch reefs which serve to increase the total surface area of coral reefs considerably, but make navigation around the site problematic. To the north and south of the bay there are extensive mangrove stands and seagrass meadows, which lead onto a reef flat and fringing reef. The village itself is protected by a seawall, from which mud flats extend to small coral reefs further out in deeper waters. This shallow tidal region receives two rivers which flow from the highlands and drain farm land. There is no mangrove region around the river outlets therefore any agricultural runoff would reach the sea directly, as there was no buffer region of seagrass or mangrove through which the freshwater could be 38

55 filtered. Field observations suggest the area surrounding the village was being used to dispose refuse SOCIO-ECONOMICS Sawaieke is one of the larger villages in Gau with approximately 3 inhabitants, and is the home of the Takalai Gau who is the chief of the Sawaieke tikina. He also maintains a political position within the Lomaiviti Island Group and therefore the effect of his influence is apparent in the rest of the village; it is more affluent with many of the houses being larger, made of concrete or in a better state of repair than in other villages. The, Sawaieke District School is located north of the main settlements, and children from villages other nearby villages also primary school here, Commercial agriculture takes the form of kava production for sale in Suva, which sold for approximately 4 FJD per kilo at the time of writing. A small gas and fuel depot is located in Sawaieke, providing fuel for the rest of the island. Subsistence agriculture and artisanal fisheries are also key livelihoods as in the rest of Gau. The majority of the farmland is situated on the steep hillsides directly behind the village. The combination of slash-and-burn agricultural techniques and steep relief means that topsoil erosion and deposition of sediments into the river is prolific in Saw. Sawaieke s MPA stretches across the bay directly in front of the village and district school from the high-tide line to the reef crest. The seagrass beds and mangroves are also protected by the MPA, all of which were mapped using GPS in the 71 phase. The village has a fleet of boats which regularly fish out on the barrier reef BIOTA HARD CORALS Acropora (24%), Diploastrea (19%) and Porites (16%) were the main genera of hard coral found in Sawaieke, eleven other genera were also represented but at below 1%. The main forms were submassive, encrusting and corymbose (data not shown). Figure 5.1 Mean percentage of coral by genus, Sawaieke 39

56 FISH A total of 7 out of 18 of reef fish families were represented in Sawaieke, with damselfish family dominating by an overwhelming majority (mean = 73.6%) of the fish species (Figure 5.2). Other species include other omnivores such as angel fish and butterflyfish but at a much lower abundance. 1 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = SWK 8 Abundance ANGEL BUTTERFLY" DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.2. Average abundance of reef fish in Sawaieke by family. Box and whiskers represent median and quartiles. Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = SWK Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Figure 5.3. Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Sawaieke, by family. Box and whiskers represent median and quartiles. 4

57 From the biomass data (Figure 5.3) it is evident that damselfish still dominate the community structure of the reef. Although numbers of angelfish, butterflyfish, surgeonfish and wrasse were low, the total biomass they represented on the reef in Sawaieke was marginally higher ALGAE Algae make up only a very small percentage (approximately 5%) of the benthic substrate, the coralline form being the most abundant DISCUSSION Socio-economic survey work and field observations suggest that the areas surveyed were also the key fishing areas for the inhabitants of Sawaieke. The dominance of small generalists such as damselfish in Sawaieke over the other trophic groups might suggest high fishing pressure of the larger species in this region. The site has a relatively high diversity of hard coral species (n = 14), and little recently killed coral or algae. The main algal species present contributes to reef building as it is coralline in form. These results suggest that the reef structure is healthy, which allows recruitment of many different genera of coral, and is not subject to high nutrient load or suffered from recent coral bleaching. However, rubble makes up approximately a fifth of the benthic composition at all depths; this suggests that the reefs have been subject to physical disturbance either by wave action or cyclone. Since more resistant forms of coral (branching porites, submassive and encrusting) are more common in Sawaieke, physical impacts appear to be frequent, suppressing the growth of more delicate forms and less hardy species, despite apparently high recruitment. Omnivorous reef fish dominate the piscine fauna at Sawaieke, especially damselfish. Larger fish, especially those in higher trophic levels, such as piscivores, invertivores and corallivores are unrepresented, which could represent fishing pressure of these fish, although statistical analysis didn t suggest that this was the case. Field observations suggest that there two distinct reef geographies within Sawaieke region, some forming part of the main barrier reef which dominates the western coast of Gau and some being fringing reefs. Therefore in future it would be useful to distinguish between the two forms of reef in the dataset and analysis and compare the two in terms of the coral reef indicators. 5.3 SOMOSOMO SITE DESCRIPTION Somosomo is a small village, situated in a valley and field observations suggest it has a population of approximately 15. There is a small river which flows through the village and farm land, but a pipeline from Sawaieke provides drinking water. Aside 41

58 from Somosomo village, the region encompasses a large number of small bays and beaches along this stretch of coastline which relatively pristine and home to extensive mangrove stands. In 26, the University of the South Pacific (USP), with the aid of a Japanese NGO, provided a Fish Aggregation Device (FAD) constructed of palm fronds, and positioned approximately one kilometre from the shore. Local fishers reported large numbers of large pelagic fish such as tuna, Spanish mackerel, barracuda and humphead wrasse were caught on a regular basis using this device. The extra catch from the FAD was sold to other villages and to Frontier-Fiji. During the 71 phase, however, strong winds broke the Japanese Fish Aggregation Device and it is no longer operational SOCIO-ECONOMICS Somosomo houses a small nursery school but older children go to the Sawaieke District School or board in Nawaikama. As access to Somosomo is possible only by sea, the village owns a small fleet of boats, which are also used regularly for fishing trips. Pigs are owned by some villagers in Somosomo which are either kept in pens on the seashore or allowed to roam free along the coastline. Additionally, there are a few small farms on the hillside directly behind the village. From the socio-economic interviews it appeared that some of the younger members of the village proposed to extend the remit of MPA, however the elders who held the decision-making power, did not want to limit the fishing grounds any further than imposed by current regulations. In Somosomo, the village Chief holds veto power. (See Part Two) BIOTA HARD CORALS Coral diversity and abundance is high within this region with a large number of tabular Acropora colonies found on the crest and reef flats. A total of 23 hard coral genera were represented out of 25. Hard coral coverage peaks on the reef flat at ~44% at -1m and decreases steadily with depth, falling to ~17% at 1-12m. This is typical of an ecosystem low in sediment and nutrients, where the limiting factor of coral growth is light availability. Hard corals were dominated by the Acropora genus (~29 %), the most dominant form being tabular. Porites species contributed 21.8% of the total, while 22 other genera coral accounted for less than 6% each. 42

59 Plate 1. Colonies of table Acropora which characterise the reef in Somosomo % The percentage of each of the coral species found in Somosomo Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Coral species Millepora Montastrea Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Pocillopora Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other Figure 5.4 Mean percentage of hard coral genera in Somosomo FISH Damselfish made up the vast majority of the fish population at Somosomo at 65.1% abundance (Figure 5.5). Fusiliers were also relatively high in abundance, at 15.5%. No other family made up >6.% of the fish population. Overall, Somosomo was the region with the highest abundance of Fusiliers, which is notable considering the number of transects carried out in Somosomo was the lowest of all regions, with only 1x2m transects completed. Wrasses were the third most abundant family, at 5.5%. Over the remaining 15 families, only 86 individuals were counted, with 43

60 representatives from the barracuda, emperor, mackerel, rabbitfish, snapper, sweetlips and trevally families missing entirely. Generalists were the most abundant trophic group (72%). Planktivores were well represented, comprising 22% of the fish population. Piscivores were missing almost entirely. The fish population on the reef slope at 1-12m was higher in number of individuals, number of species, species richness and species diversity than 6-8m. Species richness was relatively high at 1-12m ( x = 1.8), but the lowest of all regions at 6-8m ( x = 7.73) Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = SOM Abdundance 2 ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.5 Average abundance of reef fish in Somosomo, by family. Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = SOM Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.6 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Somosomo, by family. 44

61 ALGAE Algal turf is dominated by coralline and filamentous forms with red being the most dominant colour found KEY FINDINGS The bay in which Somosomo village and MPA are situated is characterised in the north by dense mangrove stands, and in the south by white sandy beaches and rocky shallows. The whole bay is sheltered from direct wave action by the Western barrier reef, allowing for the growth of more delicate tabular, branching and corymbose forms of coral. The high mean visibility and low proportion of silt suggesting low levels of sedimentation, and minimal impacts of mainland erosion. Despite high biomass and abundance of reef fish the dominance of generalists and poor representation of piscivores and herbivores suggests that there may be an influence of high fishing pressure on the ecosystem, as observed by field staff. Somosomo was one of the most beautiful areas for viewing coral along the whole west coast of Gau and was one of the favoured sites for recreational diving by Frontier-Fiji staff and Research Assistants FURTHER RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS The above observations suggest that Somosomo, although it appears relatively healthy at present with good visibility and high hard coral cover, but could be more vulnerable to phase shifts to algal dominance than other regions in the event coral bleaching events or extreme weather such as cyclones to which branching corals are more vulnerable. Given the popularity of Somosomo as a recreational dive site within Frontier-Fiji, potentially this area would be popular with commercial divers and snorkellers when nearby tourism infrastructure in Nukuyaweni is developed. Therefore measures should be taken to maintain the resilience of this ecosystem. These could include: Informing Somosomo community of these findings Educating members of the fishing community as of the importance of herbivorous fish such as rabbit fish in the Somosomo ecosystem Looking into ensuring all the pigs are kept in pens away from the coast Identification of key spawning sites of herbivorous and piscivorous fish which could be protected under seasonal MPAs 5.4 NUKUYAWENI SITE DESCRIPTION 45

62 Nukuyaweni is a non-populated region of the Gau coastline with few visible anthropogenic or natural stressors. For the past ten years a small resort has been under construction with a small workforce from Somosomo, however at the time of writing present only five guest bures were completed but work on others has started. The area surrounding the resort was landscaped in such a way to blend in with the surrounding environment. To date no guests have occupied the resort. Work on the resort was due to be completed in 2, but this date has suffered numerous setbacks, and is now set for the end of 28. In addition a telecommunications tower, the first on Gau, is rumoured to be constructed in Nukuyaweni, also at the end of 28. At the beginning of the 71 phase a few small isolated farms sprung up in the north of the region, towards Somosomo. In terms of the geography, there are no rivers or tributaries in the Nukuyaweni region. The bay is home to a few very small mangroves stands, but the majority of the bay is characterised by white sandy beaches. A fringing reef spans the entire length of the bay from Somosomo to the north round to the Frontier-Fiji base camp, Naviavia in the south. There is also a long finger of reef which juts out in the bay of Nukuyaweni and several small patches of reef scattered throughout the wider bay. The main anthropogenic impact within this region is thought to be subsistence fisheries as the Nukuyaweni region lies close to the village of Somosomo, where the villagers rely heavily on fish as an important part of their diet and there is little landbased anthropogenic activity SOCIO-ECONOMICS A number of members of the mataqali of Nukuyaweni reside in Somosomo. The mataqali own the land on which the resort is being built, and have leased it to the owners of the resort. They have also declared the area of reef from the mean high tide line to the reef crest in front of the resort a no-take Marine Protected Area. However, fishing for turtles was observed within this MPA. This fishing was sanctioned by Takalai Gau, the paramount Chief at the Council of Chiefs meeting which took place in December BIOTA HARD CORALS Hard coral cover was also diverse with 24 out of 25 key genera represented. Acropora (~15.9%) and Porites (15.4%) dominate the coral composition but Fungia (~13.%), a solitary coral, was also fond in large abundances owing to the presence of suitable substrate and conditions. There was also significant recruitment of Symphilia (~11.4%). Acropora and a large percentage of the Porites were found in their branching form, at these points the reef is sheltered from prevailing winds and storm damage. The reef flat is made of limestone and subject to strong tidal movements; here submassive and encrusting forms dominate. This was generally a healthy area where development and anthropogenic impact by local communities was relatively low. 46

63 % 15.9 Acropora The percentage of each of the coral species found in Nukuyaweni Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea 4.7 Favia 1.7 Favites 13. Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Coral species Figure 5.7 Percentage covers of hard coral genera in Nukuyaweni. Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Pocillopora 15.4 Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other FISH Damselfish made up the vast majority of the fish population in Nukuyaweni at 78.7% abundance, the highest abundance of damselfish at any site. No other family group contributed more than 5% of the piscine composition, but fish abundance as a whole was high compared to other regions. Butterflyfish were the second most abundant (4.2%), followed by wrasse (2.9%). Emperors, goatfish, rabbitfish and sweetlips were all more abundant at Nukuyaweni than all other regions. Nukuyaweni was the only region where sweetlips were recorded. 14 of the total 18 families were present, giving Nukuyaweni the highest level of biodiversity of all regions at 1-12m, and being second only to Nawaikama at 6-8m. The same is true for species richness. Generalists were the most abundant trophic group, due to the high abundance of damselfish (85.1%). Planktivores were the second most abundant group, at only 5.4%, but this was a high abundance in numbers when related to other trophic groups and regions (n = 79). All trophic groups were present, with piscivores notably more abundant here than in any other region (n = 2). Least abundant were corallivores (n = 8). The fish population on the reef slope at 1-12m was higher in number of individuals, number of species, species richness and species diversity than 6-8m. Piscivores and corallivores at Nukuyaweni were still the least represented of all the trophic groups, but abundance of piscivores was notably higher than all other regions. This could be due to a reduced fishing pressure compared to other regions as there is no village here, only an unfinished tourist resort, although the level of fishing pressure has not been documented and so this is only speculation from personal observation. The higher level of biodiversity at 1-12m compared to 6-8m matches the pattern recorded on the previous phase for Nukuyaweni. The same is true for species richness, which has been higher at 1-12m than 6-8m in all the phases surveyed. 47

64 14 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = NYW Abundance 4 2 ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.8 Average abundance of reef fish in Nukuyaweni by family. Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = NYW Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.9 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Nukuyaweni, by family DISCUSSION This is generally a healthy area, development and impact by local communities is relatively low. The recent slash and burn of a large area of the hillside above the bay and the new small farm intended for taro and cassava production, may impact the bay in the future from increased nutrient and sediment loading, and should be a target for future study. The reef in Nukuyaweni region shows signs of being in a healthy condition with high coral diversity and abundance. Results were typical of reefs that display a high fish abundance and biodiversity but these observations could not be tested on this occasion. A healthy reef can be indicated by a high abundance of hard and soft corals 48

65 together with comparatively low levels of algae. The reef in Nukuyaweni displayed a low abundance of silt and sand suggesting lower levels of sedimentation at the reef flat. The higher levels of silt at the fore reef wall could be attributed to the geography of the bay, and is possible it attracts the large number of manta ray frequently observed feeding. Furthermore, low levels of rubble were observed, indicating a reef system with low levels of disturbance. Algal cover was dominated by coralline green forms, indicative of areas of lower sedimentation. Again as is commonly associated with good areas of hard corals, there was high species diversity and abundance of fish recorded from this bay. Biomass varied with depth as can be expected, but species richness was high, perhaps reflecting the varied habitat that the high coral diversity and benthic substrata provided. 5.5 NAVIAVIA: FRONTIER-FIJI BASE CAMP SITE DESCRIPTION Naviavia, the current base camp for Frontier-Fiji, is situated on the southern end of a wide sweeping bay which is characterised by a number of smaller bays and beaches. A small river flows into the sea from a beach just north of Naviavia beach and the area between these two beaches is extensively covered with mangroves. The mangroves were mapped as part of the 71 mangrove initiative. Dense forest and grass cover the hillsides. Naviavia has no permanent river, although the brackish body of water held behind the beach has been observed on occasion to break through the beach after heavy rain into the sea. During the rainy season streams are formed, which then drain into most of the small bays. Other than the Frontier-Fiji camp, the area is uninhabited. Frontier-Fiji has endeavoured to keep the disturbance from the camp to a minimum by constructing a semi-permanent camp which consists of traditional Fijian burre type housing, building long-drops and using environmentally friendly detergents for washing. No farming is carried out here, although some local people come to gather pandana on occasion, which has a number of uses from weaving mats to flavouring foods. The reef crest of Naviavia bay is fished by people from the villages of Somosomo and Nawaikama, which lie to the north and south of the region respectively. The largest impact to the reef in Naviavia would come from the scuba dive training of the Frontier-Fiji volunteers (Berker and Roberts, 24). Although the training involves advanced buoyancy control, diver contacts and collision with coral have been observed, with branching and corymbose coral most at risk. Measures taken to attenuate this impact include extensive briefing of research assistants incorporated into the dive and BSP training and in-situ monitoring of behaviour (Berker and Roberts, 24) BIOTA HARD CORALS 49

66 Hard coral cover was dominated by the genus Porites with significant contributions to total hard coral shown by the genera Fungia, Astreopora, Montipora, Acropora and Coscinarea with smaller contributions from other genera Percentage cover of hard coral decreases from 11% to ~8% with increased depth. This trend continues for abundance of sponges but the opposite is true for soft coral abundance which increases with depth. These results suggest that the benthos becomes dominated by sand and silt with increased depth which reduces the diversity of the overall benthos and henceforth reduces the abundance and diversity of the species associated with it. Furthermore, the high level of rubble observed suggests a large amount of previous disturbance to the reef ecosystem which may have been healthier in the past. Algal cover was dominated by brown algae of the filamentous and coralline types. Filamentous algae is typically found in higher nutrient conditions, which often occur at the same time as high sedimentation, and can be used as indicator of such conditions. % The percentage of each of the coral species found in Naviavia Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Pocillopora Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other Coral species Figure 5.1 Percentage cover of hard coral genera in Naviavia FISH Damselfish made up the vast majority of the fish population in Naviavia at 71.4% abundance. Surgeonfish (5.2%), wrasse and fusiliers (both 4.4%) were the next most abundant families. Groupers were more abundant at Naviavia than all other regions except Sawaieke, where they were present at the same abundance, but this abundance was low (n=7). 13 of the total 18 families were present, with goatfish, sweetlips, barracuda and trevallys absent. Omnivores were the most abundant trophic group (78.2%), followed by herbivores at 8.6% and planktivores at 7.7%. All trophic groups were present, but planktivores were least abundant in Naviavia out of all regions, despite being third most abundant trophic group here. Least abundant were corallivores (n = 5), then piscivores (n = 9). The fish population on the reef slope at 6-8m was higher in number of individuals, number of species; species richness and species diversity than 1-12m, with species richness at 6-8m ( x = 15.75) almost double that of 1-12m ( x = 8.68). The low number of transects completed at Naviavia could explain the absence of five families, especially as goatfish, sweetlips, barracuda and elasmobranchs are all known in the area from personal observation. Piscivores and corallivores at Naviavia were 5

67 the least represented of all trophic groups, with piscivores less abundant than at all other regions other than Somosomo where fewer transects were completed (6x2m). The higher level of biodiversity at 6-8m compared to 1-12m matches the pattern recorded on the previous phase for Naviavia. The same is true for species richness, which for both quarters has been higher at 6-8m than 1-12m. 5 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = NVV Abundance 1 ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.11 Average abundance of reef fish in Naviavia by family Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = NVV Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.12 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Naviavia, by family DISCUSSION Naviavia is characterised by high rock and sand benthic coverage with herbivores and invertivores the predominant trophic groups. There was high species richness recorded with good diversity as shown for Nukuyaweni, and shows a similarity of environment although in reality the coral quality is not as good. Algal abundance is generally quite low with the most dominant form fleshy which demonstrates in concordance with the other data sets that Naviavia is in good condition and must be looked after by its new inhabitants to preserve it into the future. 51

68 As only two depths were surveyed this phase only a limited discussion of the results can be undertaken here. Benthic substrata, in the Naviavia region, is characterised by a high abundance of sand, silt, rubble and algae. The percentage cover of both sand and silt increase with depth, while the percentage cover of rubble and algae decreases between 6-8m and 1-12m. The majority of the Porites found was of the branching form and this result would suggest that the reefs of Naviavia show signs of being sheltered from the prevailing south westerly currents and subsequent storm damage. Naviavia, with Frontier base camp as its only human settlement, is not subject to the level of human impact observed at other villages. It is, however, quite heavily fished by the women from Nawaikama village, especially the reef to the south of the region. 5.6 NAWAIKAMA SITE DESCRIPTION Nawaikama village has a large sea wall protecting it and beyond this mud flats extend out for about.5 km. A large river flows into the bay, draining the surrounding hills which are heavily farmed. This river carries a heavy sediment load which is deposited in the bay and contributes to the thick mud at the front of the sea wall and the almost constantly poor visibility of the waters in the region. Nawaikama has two Marine Protected Areas, one has been established for six years and was designated in the north of the bay and encompasses the large mudflats in front of a mangrove stand, to the reef drop off point. The second is directly in front of the Nawaikama s primary school extends from the mean high tide line out to the crest of the reef. The community planted Rhizophora spp with the school children in 24 and a large number of these have succeeded to sapling stage. These are situated just to the north of the second MPA and provided an interesting subject for our BTEC students SOCIO-ECONOMICS The village of Nawaikama is one of the largest with a population of approximately 35 people. The village has access to the single road which travels the length of the island, is one of the two shipping ports and also contains the only secondary school. Additionally a government Public Works Department is situated in Nawaikama, although from informal conversations with local people it appears very little work is carried out here. The villagers farm and fish, with many of the farms situated on the high land that surrounds the entire bay. A large amount of kava is produced in the vicinity and shipped to Suva for sale BIOTA HARD CORALS 52

69 Hard coral was dominated by the genus Porites, which constituted almost 5% of the hard coral cover. The only other genus to show large abundance was Pavona. Other coral genera which constituted the majority of the remaining cover were Acropora and Stylophonia, with smaller contributions from other genera. This suggests that the massive forms of coral, which are often more resilient to sedimentation due to their shape and ability to remove sediment from their polyps, are dominant in Nawaikama Bay. % The percentage of each coral species found in Nawaikama Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Pocillopora Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other Coral species Figure 5.13 Percentage representation of hard coral genera in Nawaikama FISH Damselfish made up the vast majority of the fish population at 58.7% abundance, but this is a low representation compared to most other regions (Figure 5.14). Surgeonfish (7.5%) and butterflyfish (7.2%) were the next most abundant families. Groupers were more abundant at Nawaikama than all other regions except Sawaieke, where they were present at the same abundance, although this abundance was low (n=7). Fourteen of the total 18 families were present, with sweetlips, barracuda, triggerfish and elasmobranchs absent. Generalists were the most abundant trophic group (67.5%), followed by planktivores at 12.% and herbivores at 9.%. All trophic groups were present, and more corallivores were recorded here than at any other region (Figure 5.14). The fish population on the reef slope at 6-8m was higher in number of individuals, number of species, species richness and species diversity than 1-12m. At 6-8m, species richness ( x = 2.27) and diversity ( x = 4.31) were higher in Nawaikama than any other region. 53

70 4 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = NWK 3 2 Abundance 1 ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.14 Average abundance of reef fish in Nawaikama, by family Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = NWK Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.15 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Nawaikama, by family ALGAE The high level of sedimentation has resulted in higher algal cover with depth. Algae out-compete the coral at 6-12m depths as they are better equipped for survival in high sediment environments. With an increase in nutrients algae grow quickly and can outcompete the slower growing corals. Algal abundance was dominated by filamentous brown algae, a high nutrient indicator DISCUSSION The fact that no trophic group was less abundant than all other regions could be due to the high number of transects completed at Nawaikama. Piscivores and corallivores 54

71 were the least represented of all trophic groups, despite being present in high numbers compared to other regions, which is probably due to the high number of transects carried out in Nawaikama. The relative low abundance of these two families reflects the high fishing pressures known of Nawaikama Bay, and when questioned, fishers from Nawaikama village referred to the lack of large fish in the bay. The higher level of biodiversity at 6-8m compared to 1-12m matches the pattern recorded on the previous phase for Nawaikama. The same is true for species richness, which for both quarters has been higher at 6-8m than 1-12m. Silt levels were the highest recorded in this bay, which given the geography of the area and the large river which flows into the bay, is not surprising. Visibility in the area was always low and this made a fish census difficult, with a number of surveys aborted due to visibility levels dropping to below 5m. The benthic substratum of Nawaikama bay is predominantly silt and rock at all depths and hence has a low fish biomass. The predominant trophic group in this bay are herbivores suggesting a high algal coverage in this bay. Due to the previous removal of large stands of mangroves and the geographical nature of its inlet, along with prevailing SW currents, Nawaikama Bay acts as a trap which holds sediment within the bay where it circulates and results in a reef ecosystem with a high sediment concentration. This explains the high levels of silt and sand found within the bay. This high level of silt and sand is the main cause of coral distribution in Nawaikama Bay. Hard coral abundance is greatest at 1-3m and decreases with depth, while soft coral abundance is greatest at -1m and also decreases with depth. At both 6-8m and 1-12m the high (~3%) benthic distribution of silt causes increased stress levels for both hard and soft corals by decreasing light penetration of the water column and thus increasing the effort required by corals to clear sediment from their polyps (Morelock et al. 1979). With this increase in environmental stress, coral abundance shows a distribution typical of a light limited environment. The north east part of the bay a number of mangrove stands of varying sizes. This section of the bay faces the prevailing winds, currents and waves and due to its curved shape provides a natural sink for detritus. So despite the presence of mangrove stands water quality is often poor with high turbidity. Preliminary work (not shown) and field observations suggest the presence of mangrove stands in Nawaikama do improve local water quality with higher abundances of fish and coral in sites with mangroves than sites in the same bay that do not have mangroves. This is an area which requires extensive further study to draw conclusive results. There was approximately 1% coral coverage found in the bay, with the dominant coral being Porites. Twenty-two genera were found in Nawaikama, the colonies themselves were found to be very small. It has been speculated that, although the conditions for coral survival in the bay were poor with high turbidity, coral recruitment to the area during the larval phase was high for there to be such diversity of juvenile colonies. If the water quality was to be improved, the sediment and nutrient loadings reduced and more mangroves to be planted there may be a way to improve the hard corals in the area and allow them to develop to a large, adult size. 55

72 5.7 LEVUKA SITE DESCRIPTION Levuka is a small settlement located at the bottom of a large almost flat stretch of coast on south-west of Gau, which curves into a large bay at the southern end. The reef is largely fringing and Levuka is subject to huge tidal ranges, at low tide almost 1km is exposed mud flats, with some seaweeds and further out hardy coral communities. The reef drops off into the sea, again like most of western Gau, protected by the barrier reef, approximately at a distance of 2 kms away. There are some patch reefs here which become more frequent further south. Due to the topographical nature of the island, the farms used by these villagers are placed upon steep hillsides with run-off a possible problem SOCIO-ECONOMICS The villagers survive on subsistence fishing and farming, with the farms located in the high ground to the back of the village. It is here the road passes through and the biggest shops are situated near. Levuka region is in extremely close proximity to Nukuloa with the two villages sharing a primary school. It has a village of approximately 2 people with the vast majority of villagers being farmers in trade. The villagers of Levuka have also installed a fish aggregation device approximately 5m south of the village and enforcement of the MPA is carried out by some of the local villagers who are also on the Lomani Gau council BIOTA HARD CORALS The hard coral cover was dominated by Stylophora These were typically massive or sub-massive in form, which is another indication of a system high in disturbance as massive species are more resistant to wave action than branching forms, which are almost non-existent in this area. 56

73 % Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea The percentage of each of the coral species found in Levuka Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites 17.8 Fungia Galaxea 2.9 Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Coral species Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Figure 5.16 Mean percentage of coral by genus, Levuka Pocillopora Porites 58.2 Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other FISH Fish diversity is low at Levuka, although in part this is likely to be due to low sampling effort at this site. Again damselfish are by far the most numerous (figure 5.17), comprising the majority of the fish biomass at the site. Only surgeonfish, wrasse and butterflyfish were present in any appreciable numbers. 3 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = LVK 25 Abundance ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.17 Average abundance of reef fish in Levuka, by family 57

74 Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = LVK Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.18 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Levuka, by family DISCUSSION Levuka was found to have low fish diversity and species richness, this may be a reflection of the small amount of surveys that have been done at this site overall. However, as reflected in the fish data, there was very little coral diversity, the worst gathered, with only six separate species recorded, although they covered 1% of the benthic substrate. The low level of diversity may be attributed to the high silt, sand and rubble composition of the benthic substrate, none of which provides a good anchor for young corals to attach during their free swimming larval phase and may also be smothered by sediment, known to kill corals. 5.8 NADRODO/ YADUA SITE DESCRIPTION Nadrodro (also known as Yadua) is situated on the south-eastern side of Gau and is like Vione in its geography. Nadrodro, like Vione, is not protected by a barrier reef, instead is situated on a large outcrop of limestone rock, with a steep drop off to the fore reef. Wide inroads and valleys have eroded into the limestone rock and have created a diverse habitat for huge schools of fish which are attracted to the drop off. Mangroves are not dominant here; as Nadrodro is fronted by a long sandy beach, and a fringing reef extending out over the limestone flats. There is a river outlet into the sea here and releases any sediment directly, without passing through any mangrove systems. Nadrodro is a small settlement and like other regions on Gau, the villagers support themselves by farming the local region and fishing from the drop off at sea. The coral on this coast suffered greatly during the 1998 El Nino and coral bleaching events, with mass bleaching and die-off (Biddick et al 26) BIOTA 58

75 HARD CORALS Although not close to Levuka, this site shows similarities in its coral composition, with low species diversity being dominated by Stylophora species. Acropora and Diploastrea are also relatively abundant. Despite its exposed location, there is considerable coral cover at 6-8 metres and the site warrants further investigation. % The percentage of each of the coral species found in Yadua Acropora Alveopora Astreopora Coscinarea Cyphastrea Diploastrea Favia Favites Fungia Galaxea Goniastrea Goniopora Lobophyllia Millepora Montastrea Montipora Pachyseris Pavona Platygyra Coral species Figure 5.19 Mean percentage of coral by genus, Nadrodro/Yadua Pocillopora Porites Stylophora Symphyllia Tubastrea Turbinarea Other The neighbouring village of Vadravadra suffered a high percentage of coral dying off, although new juvenile coral colonies are prevalent FISH Thirteen genera were recorded in Nadrodro, and like Vadravadra (Brown et al 26) many of them were juvenile. This environment owing to the lack of barrier reef reflects that of Vione, and so not only has many reef fish but schools of pelagics which use the canyons into the limestone as habitat. 14 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = NDO 12 1 Abundance ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Figure 5.2 Average abundance of reef fish in Nadrodro, by family 59

76 Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = NDO Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.21 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Nadrodro, by family DISCUSSION Most of the coral on the top of the limestone causeway is sporadic, and of low genus count. The extreme tidal movement over this region of the island, the fact that it is not protected by a barrier reef and is subject to the full force of the oceans waves must be a factor in these findings. 5.9 NUKULOA SITE DESCRIPTION The MPA is situated on the flats directly in front of this village. To the north of the village are a couple of small bays with sparse mangrove stands. There are a number of small streams and rivers that run directly into the sea throughout this region SOCIO-ECONOMICS This region originally consisted of a settlement and the village of Nukuloa, although these have practically joined to become a single village. There is a primary school on the outskirts of the village. There are approximately 15 residents in this community, and it enjoys very close relations with its neighbour Levuka. The majority of the local villagers are farmers growing root crops, with a small number of fishermen. The farms lie on the slopes directly behind the village to the East beyond the road which runs directly through the village. Slash and burn activities are the preferred method of farming here and this leads to heavy sedimentation and run-off on the reefs BIOTA 6

77 HARD CORALS This very low level of coral cover can be explained by the environmental conditions. This region is not protected at all by prevailing winds and therefore often sees large waves buffeting the reef. This causes increased turbidity and churns up the sediment causing very low visibility which inhibits coral growth. These conditions combined with low levels of available rock for colonization by juvenile corals mean that the coral cover is subsequently low. Unlike many of the other regions, the hard coral cover in Nukuloa is not dominated by just one or two genera. Porites species account for ~17% of total hard coral cover while Pavona clavus accounts for ~16%, Lobophylia ~11% and Turbinaria ~11%. There are very low levels of branching corals found in Nukuloa region with hard coral cover dominated by massive and sub-massive species of coral. These species are more resistant to high disturbance systems with large wave action as opposed to branching species which dominate in regions of low disturbance FISH Damselfish were the most abundant family, representing over half of the total fish population (52.4%), followed by fusiliers (15%) and butterflyfish (8.%). Thirteen of the eighteen families were present, with barracuda, parrotfish, rabbitfish, sweetlips, trevally and triggerfish all absent, despite the high number of transects carried out in the region (figure 5.22). Butterflyfish, angelfish and damselfish were all lower in abundance than all other regions, again despite the high number of transects. Generalists were the most abundant trophic group (61.3%), followed by planktivores at 12.% and herbivores at 9.%. All trophic groups were present, but corallivores were at <1%. The number of generalists was lower than any other reason because this group consists of angelfish, butterflyfish and damselfish. The fish population on the reef slope at 6-8m was higher in number of individuals, number of species, species richness and species diversity than 1-12m. The fish population at Nukuloa appears to have lower abundance than all other regions, highlighted by the fact that for three of the eight families present at all regions, abundance was lowest at Nukuloa, and that five of the eighteen families recorded were absent altogether. However, species richness and diversity were average relative to other regions. Despite the high number of transects, the lack of a significant difference in abundance between all families and all feeding groups suggests a population where all families and groups are equally represented. 61

78 12 Boxplot of Fish Abundance by Family Site = NKL ANGEL BUTTERFLY DAMSEL BARRACUDA EMPEROR GROUPER SNAPPER TREVALLY TUNA FUSILIER MACKEREL WRASSE GOATFISH SWEETLIPS TRIGGERFISH SURGEONFISH RABBITFISH PARROTFISH Abundance Figure 5.22 Average abundance of reef fish in Nukuloa, by family Biomass (g) per 5m3 transect Boxplot of Fish Biomass by Family Site = NKL Angel Butterfly Damsel Barracuda Emperor Grouper Snapper Trevally Tuna Fusilier Mackerel Wrasse Goatfish Sweetlips Triggerfish Surgeonfish Rabbitfish Parrotfish Figure 5.23 Average biomass (in grams per 5m 3 ) of reef fish in Nukuloa, by family 62

79 6. SEDIMENTATION 6.1 INTRODUCTION In 26, the waters in the fringing reefs around the villages of Nawaikama, Nukuloa and Levuka were the found to be significantly more turbid than waters around the other villages (Brown et al. 26). Water turbidity is an indicator of high levels of sedimentation, usually as a result of freshwater run-off and dredging of the benthos. The level of sediment particles suspended in freshwater has been found to be dependent on: watershed size and slope; volume and intensity of rainfall; soil condition and land use (Hubbard, 1987 in Rogers, 199). The bay adjacent to Nawaikama and Levuka are vulnerable to higher levels of sedimentation due to topography and prevailing currents of the area as well as the anthropogenic impacts of commercial scale crop rotation and slash-and-burn agriculture. Near Nawaikama there is a large river which drains into the bay, carrying with it loose soil sediments. The nature of traditional crop-rotation slash-and-burn agriculture means that large areas of land are left devoid of flora or crops and the topsoil is exposed, during rainfall this is washed into the river. Due to the geographical nature and shape of the inlet (Figure 6.1), with prevailing south-westerly currents, sediment becomes trapped, particularly in the northern section of the bay. WIND DIRECTION Figure 6.1 Wind direction and placement of villages around the Nawaikama peninsular. 63

80 In addition to the sedimentation caused by agricultural runoff in the bay, there is also a public works depot that regularly dredges the Nawaikama fringing reef to collect gravel in order to fill pot holes on Gau s road. Mangroves and seagrass beds act as a trap for freshwater sediments. There is evidence that mangrove stands in front of Nawaikama has been removed in past years which has further compounded the geography of the way and watershed. It is not known when these were removed, or if it happened gradually over the course of many years. However in 24, mangroves were planted which have now succeeded to sapling stage. Increased levels of sediments deposited in the water has the following effects (McLaughlin et al 23).: - suspended particles in the water column o increased turbidity o attenuation of light available for photosynthesis by the endosymbiotic zooanthellae o reduced photosynthesis reduces the overall metabolism of the reef o bleaching due to expulsion of zooanthellae. - particles settle on the reef o directly smother coral polyps - affects feeding affect growth. o prevents coral larvae settling on the substrat reduced recruitment. 6.2 METHODOLOGY SECCHI DISCS Although there is a complex relationship between vertical visibility and sedimentation load rates, it does provide a useful indicator as a baseline comparison between sites (Holmes 197). Coupled with socio-economic surveys as well as direct observation, causes for the differences in water turbidity around the island of Gau can be found. As a part of the BSP, the vertical visibility (turbidity of the water column) was measured using a Secchi discs by the Physical Surveyor (see 3.3.2). The plastic Secchi disc was 8 inches in diameter attached to a tape measure, divided into quadrants, with two quadrants painted black and two painted white. The Secchi disc was slowly lowered into the water from the shady side of the boat until no longer visible. The depth at which it was no longer visible was recorded. Then the disc was raised until it became just visible again. This depth too was recorded. The two depths were averaged to obtain the Secchi depth (Holmes 197). This was carried out at the m and 25m of the BSP transect. 6.3 RESULTS There was no significant differences in the vertical visibility between the 26 and 27 data in the heavily sedimented areas of Nawaikama (T-test, p =.476), Levuka (p =.191) or Naviavia (p =.929). In a comparison between all the sites there was a significant difference in visibility, (ANOVA, p<.1) and the Post-Hoc LSD test (Table x) shows the greatest difference between Nawaikama (lowest visibility) and Somosomo (highest visibility). 64

81 6.3.1 NAWAIKAMA The visibility in Nawaikama was frequently observed to be low, with visual fish censuses abandoned on occasion due to the difficulties in proceeding. Field observations suggested water nearer the mangroves was clearer than at sites further away. Despite the low averages (mean = 7.16) highest recorded visibility was 29m in Nawaikama bay, with the higher visibilities recorded at the fore reef wall than on the reef flat. In addition to the poor visibility, silt, sand, rubble and rock, made up 84% of the benthic substrate. Of the hard coral present (ca 1% of benthos), there were 22 genera present, with Porites being slightly more dominant making up 14.7% (see 5.6). The hard coral colonies in Nawaikama were found to be small, and considering the size and the diversity of the corals (Figure 6.2) suggests that recruitment levels are high but following colonisation, growth rates are low LEVUKA This site is further south along the same bay as Nawaikama. Due to the distance of Levuka from base camp, survey work was carried out here in brief satellite camps one in February and again in August. In Levuka, the range in visibility was lower than in Nawaikama (min = 3m, max = 18.5m) but average visibility was slightly higher (mean = 8.95). Silt, sand, rubble and rock still dominated the benthos at the southern end of the bay. Coral diversity was significantly less with only six genera found with Stylophora dominating at 58.2%. 6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Continued monitoring of the bay between Nawaikama and Levuka, with more BSP s carried out on the southern part of the bay towards Levuka As the relationship between water turbidity and actual sedimentation load and rate is complex, sediment traps could be set up to measure deposition rates and the concentration of suspended matter. This would be carried out in conjunction with the measure of light transmission. Formation of a spatio-temporal database/gis including areas of mangroves mapped to date, turbidity plotted at GPS locations to evaluate seasonal changes and spatial extent of sedimentation. Further comprehensive socio-economic interviews (with permission of the Lomani Gau) to elicit the nature of the farms, size, ownership, agricultural methods employed which would continue on from the preliminary work carried out in

82 Terrestrial work - land use/disturbance transects as so far there anecdotal evidence of level of burnt land so far. Monitoring of growth of the newly planted mangrove stands. 66

83 7. HOLOTHURIANS OF WESTERN GAU DAVID COOPER, DEBBIE WINTON & SARA SIDDIG 7.1 AIM To create an inventory of the holothurian species present in the areas surveyed by Frontier-Fiji. To document the abundance, distribution, size and habitats frequented for holothurians around the western coast of Gau between Nawaikama and Somosomo. 7.2 OBJECTIVES 1) Count the number of holothurians encountered along fifty metre transects, identifying each one to species level, measuring the length and girth and noting the benthos on which they are found. 2) Collate data on holothurians recorded on baseline transects (from algae and invertebrates surveyors) by snorkelling and diving. 3) Record opportunistic sightings of holothurians, including species name, length, girth and the benthos on which they are found. 4) Determine abundance of each holothurian species, placing them in broad categories such as common or rare. 5) Identify in which habitats holothurians are most commonly found. 6) Identify any correlation between coral cover and holothurian abundance. 7.3 INTRODUCTION The beche-de-mer industry is a fast-growing and profitable industry worldwide, and is widely practiced in Fiji. Large profits can be made by collecting, drying and selling sea cucumbers, making fishing for them a worthwhile and relatively quick way to earn money. Collection of huge numbers occurs in some countries and there are cases of massive population crashes (e.g. Mauritius). We currently have no knowledge of the holothurian population of Gau, nor of the extent to which they are fished. As a family they are extremely important in nutrient and sediment turnover, providing a vital role to the ecosystem and a dwindling population would have implications on the health of the coral reef system as a whole. As a resource for the local people, sustainable fishing is vital to ensure the resource is available for future generations to utilise. Information on the current extent of fishing for holothurians and continual monitoring is necessary to deduce whether or not the industry on Gau is currently sustainable, and if not, development of a management plan would be recommended. 7.4 METHODOLOGY Holothurians were surveyed on specialized transects, as well as opportunistic sightings being recorded. The transect method used was sets of 3 x 5 m transects parallel to each other, along the reef slope, at various sites in the bays of Somosomo, Naviavia beach and Nawaikama. Deeper surveys (6m+) were carried out whilst diving and shallower surveys (1-3m) whilst snorkelling. The surveyor moved along the transect in a zig-zag pattern, covering a width of 2.5m either side of the transect line, 67

84 searching for holothurians. Individuals found were identified to species level, or a detailed description and sketch made for later identification. The length and girth were both measured, taking care to make sure the animal did not contract its body due to stress. The habitat on which each individual was found was also recorded, for example, coral, sand, silt or rock. On completion of the transect, the tape measure was taken back up, and with the reef on the right, the surveyor moved 5 m to their left (at a 9º angle to the reef, moving away from it), to lay a second 5 m transect parallel to the first. The transect was completed in the same way as the first, and on completion, a third transect completed 5 m away from and parallel to the second. An area 5 m by 15 m was therefore covered, with a depth range from 1 to 3 m when snorkelling and 6 m to up to 12 m when diving. Sites were accessed by a 23ft fibreglass boat with 4hp engine, driven by a member of staff, with a boat marshal onboard. Sites were in Somosomo Bay, Nawaikama Bay and off Naviavia Beach and chosen randomly, with co-ordinates recorded using a handheld GPS unit. The boat marshall recorded date, time, location (S and E coordinates), personnel, wind direction and speed, surface temperature, cloud cover and dive statistics (time in/out and air in/out). Surveys were carried out in pairs, with one surveyor and one laying the tape and acting as a dive buddy on diving surveys. An opportunistic sightings record was also set-up, requesting all RAs and staff to document any sea cucumber they saw whilst snorkelling, diving or exploring the intertidal zone. Data recorded was species name, location, depth, length, girth, habitat and name of recorder. On Monday 14 th May in Somosomo and during the satellite camp in Levuka (23rd- 25th May), villagers were informally interviewed regarding sea cucumber fishing on Gau. Questions included what is caught, how, where, how often, how much, the amount they sell for and the history of the industry on Gau. 7.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A total of eight species of holothurian were identified along the west coast of Gau. Photo evidence was acquired for five of the eight species and can be seen in Plate 1. Data from transects and interviews has yet to be analysed, therefore the results and discussion for this project are to be included in the 28 Technical Report. 68

85 a) b) c) d) e) Plate 2 Holothurians of Gau a) Thelenota anax; b) Bohadschia graeffei; c) Thelenota ananas;d) Holothuria fuscopunctata; e) Holothuria edulis

86

87 8. SOFT CORAL RAPID ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE (SCRAP) NICK MOSS & LUCY GWEN GILLIS 8.1 INTRODUCTION Soft coral is the common name for the order Alcyonacea. The soft corals can be distinguished from hard corals by the fact that soft coral polyps always have eight tentacles, while hard coral polyps have multiples of six tentacles. Unlike hard corals, soft corals contribute only a small way to the formation of the limestone structure of the reef, with only a few species depositing a skeleton. Despite this lack of calcium carbonate deposition, soft corals play an important role in reef ecology providing habitat and food for many species of reef organism. Like hard corals, soft corals contain symbiotic zooanthellae within their tissues and photosynthesize light providing an important energy source within the reef ecosystem. Without the restriction of having to deposit a hard calcium carbonate skeleton, soft corals grow much quicker than hard corals and therefore can regenerate quicker after periods of harsh environmental conditions and re-colonize an area after severe disturbance. In the dive community, Fiji is commonly referred to as the soft coral capital of the world. Previously soft coral abundance and diversity on Gau was only assessed during baseline dives and snorkels, which generated a small amount of useable data. For this reason it was decided by FJM to study the abundance and diversity of soft corals more accurately. 8.2 METHODOLOGY The Soft Coral Rapid Assessment Procedure (SCRAP) was developed by David Cooper of Frontier Fiji during 72 to assess abundance, diversity, colony size and distribution of soft corals along the fringing reefs of the island of Gau. It is extremely quick and easy to implement and requires only two participants; a soft coral surveyor and a physical role. This method was originally developed under the premise of incorporation into the Baseline Procedure, but with its initial success in BTEC projects, it has been implemented separately from Baseline Assessments and has formed a completely separate assessment procedure PHYSICAL SURVEYOR The physical surveyor requires minimal equipment. Their role is to lay out a tape measure, similar to that in the Baseline Procedure. Depths chosen for assessment are in line with the Baseline Procedure -1m, 1-3m, 6-8m and 1-12m. The physical role also involves recording transect depth at, 2, 25 and 45 m SOFT CORAL SURVEYOR The soft coral surveyor requires only a slate on which to record soft coral abundance and colony size. The soft coral surveyor transverses across 2.5m either side of the transect tape recording soft coral occurrence. Colonies are recorded in size brackets - 5cm, 5-1cm etc up to 5+cm.

88 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report RESULTS So far twelve genera of soft coral have been identified although identification of exact species can be extremely difficult without examination of the sclerites. The genera identified so far are: Anthelia Antipathes Cladiella Dendronepthya/Scleronepthya Echinogorgia Junceella Lithophyton Lobophyton Plexauridae Sarcophyton Sinularia Tubipora 8.4 DISCUSSION As only a limited number of surveys were conducted in 27, it is not possible to draw any certain conclusions an abundance and distribution of soft coral around Gau. However now that the SCRAP procedure has been established and tested, with proper implementation it should be quick and easy to gain a large volume of results and should be basis for further study in the following research season. Frontier Fiji 72

89 9. SEAGRASS WATCH 9.1 INTRODUCTION NICK MOSS, LUCY GWEN GILLIS & MARK STEER Seagrasses are angiosperms more closely related to terrestrial lilies and gingers than to true grasses. They grow in sediment on the sea floor with erect, elongate leaves and a buried root-like structure (rhizomes). There are sixty described species of seagrasses worldwide, within twelve genera, four families and two orders. The species found in Fiji are Halodule pinifolia, Halophila ovalis, Syringodium isotifolium and S. isoetifolium; all of which are found on the island of Gau. The small number of species, however, does not reflect the importance of seagrass ecosystems which provide a sheltered, nutrient-rich habitat for a diverse flora and fauna (Hemminga & Duarte 2). Seagrasses are often closely linked to other community types. In the tropics the associations are likely to be complex interactions with mangrove communities and coral reef systems (Hemminga & Duarte 2). A number of environmental parameters are critical to whether seagrass will grow and persist. These include physical parameters that regulate the physiological activity of seagrasses (temperature, salinity, waves, currents, depth, substrate and day length), natural phenomena that limit the photosynthetic activity of the plants (light, nutrients, epiphytes and diseases), and anthropogenic inputs that inhibit access to available light for growth (nutrient and sediment loading). The habitat complexity within seagrass meadows enhances the diversity and abundance of animals. The high primary production rates of seagrasses are closely linked to the high production rates of associated fisheries. These plants support numerous herbivore- and detritivore-based food chains, and are considered very productive pastures of the sea. The associated economic values of seagrass meadows are very large, although not always easy to quantify (Hemminga & Duarte 2). Loss of seagrasses has been reported from most parts of the world, sometimes from natural causes, e.g., high energy storms, or "wasting disease. More commonly, loss has resulted from human activities, e.g., as a consequence of eutrophication or land reclamation and changes in land use. It is important to document seagrass species diversity distribution and abundance, to be able to identify areas requiring conservation measures. Responsive management based on adequate information will help to prevent any further significant areas and species being lost. Seagrass meadows should be mapped as a first step toward understanding these communities. Detailed studies of changes in community structure of seagrass communities are essential to understand the role of these communities and the effects of disturbance on their composition, structure and rate of recovery. The seagrass beds on the island of Gau have been monitored by Frontier Fiji for Seagrass Watch, an international seagrass assessment program, since the start of Frontier Fiji s involvement with the University of the South Pacific. Seagrass beds in Gau are prevalent in most shallow water areas along the eastern coast on the island. Unfortunately due to certain discrepancies of past monitoring, the methodology has been reviewed and consequently all past seagrass data has found to be incorrect. The total area of seagrass meadows in Gau is unknown which is why it so important for Frontier Fiji to assimilate data for Seagrass Watch.

90 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report METHODOLOGY Frontier Fiji implemented the Seagrass Watch Intertidal Monitoring Method. This was completed at Naviavia beach, during low tide to ensure that seagrasses were correctly identified. The materials used for the monitoring intertidal seagrass beds are as follows; three 5m fibreglass measuring tapes, six 5cm plastic tent pegs, one standard quadrant, three monitoring data sheets, clipboard, pencil, ruler, percent cover standard sheet and a seagrass identification sheet. Firstly within the 5 m by 5 m site, three parallel 5 m transects were laid out, 25 m apart and perpendicular to the shore. The start and end locations of each transect were recorded using a handheld GPS unit. Within sequential quadrats running along the transect the following evaluators where noted: sediment composition (gravel, sand, fine sand and mud), seagrass species composition, canopy height, algae percentage cover, important features and any marine organisms. Once monitoring was complete, all the data sheets where checked to ensure everything was completed, all equipment was removed from the site and all equipment was washed and packed away. 9.3 RESULTS Three species of seagrass were recorded at Naviavia, H. pinifolia, H. ovalis and S. isoetifolium. H. ovalis was much less abundant than the other two species, occurring only sporadically. Showing classic zonation patterns, H. pinifolia dominated the upper reaches of the study area, gradually giving way to S. isoetifolium nearer the low water mark (figure 9.1). 7 6 Percentage Cover H. pinifolia S. isoetifolium H. ovalis Algae Distance from high water mark (m) Figure 9.1 Percentage cover of seagrass species and algae at a seagrass bed in Naviavia The zonation pattern was also reflected in the canopy height of the two main species, which increased from the interaction zone (figure 9.2). Frontier Fiji 74

91 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report Canopy height (cm) Distance from high water mark (m) H. pinifolia S. isoetifolium H. ovalis Figure 9.2 Average seagrass canopy height at different heights along the shore. A small number of creatures (n = 18) were found within the bed. These included echinoderms, blue cowries (Cypraea errones), ghost crabs (Ocypode sp.) and a banded sea krait (Laticauda colubrina). 9.4 DISCUSSION The monitoring indicated that H. pinifolia was in all cases the dominant species closer to the shore, S. isotifolium was the dominant species at deeper waters. H. ovalis was present this was only in patchy areas mid-transect. All three species of seagrasses found on Naviavia are pioneering species, which would indicate that s seagrass in Naviavia are present after a period instability; this may be due to the destruction of the mangroves along the coast of this area. H. pinifolia is generally present on intertidal sandbanks, which our results confirm, with H. ovalis and S. isotifolium in more shallow water environments; the presence of these species in mid transect would confirm this as these area would generally be covered in water (Longstaff and Dennison 1999). These two species generally need only low light densities to photosynthesise correctly, whilst H. pinifolia requires large exposure to light to maintain a healthy ecosystem. Changes in substrate from the shore are also indicative of the species present, with H. pinifolia and H. ovalis having the ability to grow in sandier substrate, whilst S. isotifolium being present with less wave action, and consequently a gravel substrate. The presence of H. pinifolia closer to the shore would indicate that this species can tolerate large environmental stresses including wave action, prolonged periods of exposure etc. This would also indicate that this species has showed limited anthropogenic impacts from Frontier Fiji, as the seagrass beds monitored of this particular species show good percentage cover with healthy leaves and high canopy cover. H. ovalis, although a pioneering species, is not so hardy to environmental or anthropogenic impacts, the canopy height and low percentage cover would verify this. This species indicated increasingly patchy cover towards areas of high wave action and trampling from staff and volunteers. Due to the position of S. isotifolium in deeper water, has not had increased pressures from Frontier Fiji, this is indicated by a high percentage cover with good canopy height. Frontier Fiji 75

92 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Seagrass is an important marine habitat for a variety of species and as such we would hope to see various species of organisms within the beds. Most creatures were found within H. pinifolia and S. isotifolium, these were both the most abundant seagrass beds with large canopy cover that organisms would require. The larger creatures where found generally in S. isotifolium beds, this would be because of the percentage of time this species spent underwater. Smaller organisms which are both terrestrial and aquatic were on average found on the H. pinifolia pastures, which would be inductive of their intertidal position. The only species not found on a seagrass bed was the Fijian land crab found at 5 m; however this crabs usual habitat is within burres. More animals were observed further away from areas which were used more by staff and volunteers. i.e. the route from the dive deck to the boats, indicating an effect of disturbance. This would also explain a change in seagrass structure in the transect nearest the camp; H. pinifolia was absent for the first 2 m. Increased trampling from members of Frontier Fiji in this area and the consequential sedimentation is evident that these have had a greater impact on the seagrass beds, with all species of seagrasses being pushed back towards the sea from their normal environmental range. 9.5 CONCLUSIONS Halodule pinifolia and Syringodium isotifolium are both shown in Naviavia to be pioneering species which are dominant near the shoe and the later towards deeper water. Whilst Halophila ovalis has patchy beds tending towards mid transects. H. pinifolia has shown a good resistance to a large range of anthropogenic impacts and environmental variability s, with good overall coverage and normal canopy height. S. isotifolium again showed healthy pastures however this species due to its position in the water has less environmental and human stresses. The large amounts of algae coverage in the seagrass beds would indicate a area of high sedimentation; this is probably due to trampling and increased run-off from the un-protected beach. The marine organisms found were generally in deeper water which ad little or no exposure in shallow tides. Creatures which were found in exposed areas of the beds where generally both terrestrial and aquatic organisms. Due to past data being discounted no comparisons can be made in relation to the effect that frontier Fiji has on the seagrass beds in Naviavia. However, seagrass beds nearer the regular crossings made from the dive deck can be seen to be patchier than others, scour marks and fewer marine organisms were also noted. Recommendations for the future management of these ecosystems are as follows: A systematic monitoring process, where villages on the eastern side of the island are surveyed every six months to thoroughly investigate changes in health of the seagrass. Secondly, a pathway is indicated on the seagrass beds of Naviavia, so that damage is limited on the remaining seagrass beds. Frontier Fiji 76

93 PART 2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND CAPACITY BUILDING

94

95 1. TURTLE CONSERVATION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 1.1 INTRODUCTION DAN WEAVER Sea turtles were abundant in most of the world s tropical oceans until the 18 th and 19 th centuries. Since then, human impacts on these species have overwhelmed their ability to maintain their numbers which has led to a worldwide decline (Weaver 1995). Six of the seven recognized species of sea turtle are currently listed on the IUCN (World Conservation Union) Red List as endangered or vulnerable. All sea turtle species are listed in CITES (The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) (Weaver, 1995). Traditionally throughout many Pacific island cultures sea turtles have been revered, with many cultures (including Fijian) believing them to be sacred species (Luna, 23). Within the Lau group of islands (Fiji), turtle meat was only eaten at important feasts, and then only by high ranking persons, with the head being reserved for the high ranking chief and the rest of the body parts being distributed according to a person s rank (Thompson, 194). There is even evidence of turtle farming among this group of Fijians, rearing the turtles in a brackish lake in the centre of the island. A global strategy for the conservation of sea turtles was developed by the IUCN in It had become clear that comprehensive and integrated conservation efforts were needed on a global scale if sea turtles were to be safeguarded from extinction (Weaver, 1995). In 1995 the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy was created. On May 31 st to June 1 st 26, this strategy was reviewed and it was determined that effective turtle conservation had not been accomplished within the ten years of this strategy s existence. It was clear that the strategy was not being seriously observed and the lack of success in turtle conservation in Fiji was attributed to numerous reasons. It was obvious that turtle management laws and regulations such as the current moratorium on turtle harvesting was not known to the people, as they still harvested turtles for social and other ceremonial obligations, apparently abusing their exemption rights. Loss of habitats and nesting sites were a main threat as was pollution and the increasing commercial use of turtle products. 26 was declared the Pacific Year of the Turtle, indicating a renewed interest in the conservation and protection of these species. Some of the issues that were discussed within the strategy review include the significance of research and monitoring, the importance of policy in relation to legislation and enforcement, the role of awareness and education, and the attractions of community engagement and sustained conservation and partnerships. These areas were identified as a priority so that the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy may be more relevant and effective (Fiji Department of Fisheries et al. 26). The goals set out by the meeting were:

96 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 To allow sea turtle populations to recover by providing support mechanisms which facilitate community action for education and awareness, training & monitoring and data collection By 211, to reduce the threats to marine turtle populations by increasing: awareness, information & knowledge, community conservation and local and global partnerships regulation enforcement, changes in attitudes in order to increase the number of turtles in Fiji. By 226, to have a regulated/controlled harvest of turtles. This implies recovering the population to levels where harvest can be biologically sustainable without disrupting customary/traditional practices through protecting nesting habitats and increasing the extent of feeding habitats and promoting zero accidental capture (death associated with fishing by-catch) within Fiji waters and in waters that OUR turtles cross; with effective enforcement and monitoring. (Fiji Department of Fisheries et al, 26). The meeting covered many possibilities of future marine turtle management including: the possibility of declaring known nesting sites as Marine Protected Areas, the involvement of tourist operators in the management of turtles and the potential to earn an income from such activity, the enforcement of the management arrangements that are in place and the consideration of a permanent ban on turtle harvesting (Fiji Department of Fisheries et al. 26). This project aims to enhance the marine turtle conservation effort and to extend the area of research from that currently being undertaken by the University of the South Pacific and the Ministry of Fisheries, to encompass the Fijian island of Gau. By conducting this project we aim to fulfil the objectives of the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy (26) by creating a more effective turtle management programme, through better information, research and monitoring with the involvement and support of local communities. This project was part funded by PADI Project Aware, whose support provided all educational materials published as part of the education programme. Frontier-Fiji also collaborated with Meme Laveti of the Institute of Marine Resources (IMR) who assisted in delivering the workshops and training the Community Turtle Wardens, the South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPERP), WWF and the University of the South Pacific (USP) 1.2 AIMS Working within the parameters of the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy, Frontier-Fiji aims to implement a long-term community-based conservation and monitoring plan to enable sustainable harvesting and long term survival of sea turtles on Gau. Frontier Fiji 8

97 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 AIMS 1. To ascertain the abundance, distribution and size of green and hawksbill turtles METHODODOLOGY Opportunistic sightings, dedicated beach patrols and local knowledge 2. To locate main nesting beaches, mating areas and feeding grounds for green and hawksbill turtles. 3. To map all seagrass areas around the island using GPS 4. To investigate the possibility of extending current Marine Protected Areas (MPA) or establishing new Seasonal MPA in order to protect those identified areas. 5. To determine the importance of sea turtles and eggs to the people s way of life. Underwater surveys using scuba and snorkel equipment Through careful negotiation and consultation with Lomani Gau and community stakeholders Through questionnaire surveys in local communities 6. To assess the extent to which sea turtles are being harvested, by what means and for what purpose, within each individual village to form a comparison. 7. To evaluate the size of past catches in contrast to those of present day. 8. To raise sea turtle awareness on Gau. 9. To establish sea turtle awareness and conservation strategies as part of the school curriculum of Gau. Through environmental education workshops, establishing community turtle wardens and distributing information regarding turtle ecology, conservation and threats to all stakeholders Table 1.1 Aims of the sea turtle conservation project and how they were to be achieved With the realisation of these aims, this project will establish a long-term communitybased turtle conservation project that will continue to work in conjunction with the University of the South Pacific and the Department of Fisheries in Fiji. This report will concentrate on Aims 5 9, social economic surveys, workshops and warden training undertaken by the project. 1.3 STUDY SITE Although Gau is the fifth largest island within the 332 Fijian Islands, there has never been any research conducted there to determine sea turtle abundance, species and distribution. However, it has been established through local knowledge that green Frontier Fiji 81

98 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 (Chelonia mydas) and hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles, which are classified as endangered and critically endangered respectively (IUCN 1996; Seminoff, 24), are the two species widely found in the waters of Gau and that there are several nesting beaches around the island, though this has never been documented formally. While there are no population data on turtle numbers around Gau, local fishermen have noted a decline in sightings and subsequently a decline in catch over the years. In order for turtle harvesting to remain sustainable in the future, it is important to implement a management plan with an emphasis on conservation. This will also allow an assessment of the impact turtle harvesting is having on the overall population. 1.4 METHODOLOGY The island of Gau is administered in a predominantly traditional manner, therefore any research or development projects must first be put before the island council, known as the Lomani Gau (see section 2.4). This council is the dominant influence on Gau, and as such makes all the decisions regarding resource use and community participation in schemes of this nature. Consequently, their support and influence was essential to initiating this project. Once agreement had been reached with the island council, Frontier-Fiji approached all ten schools of the island, as environmental education was seen as an important aim of the project. Questionnaires and interviews were conducted in the villages of Nawaikama, Somosomo and Sawaike, which covered topics such as: attitudes towards turtles, consumption of turtle meat (participation and frequency), fishing methods (target fishing or by-catch), frequency of capture, areas of harvest and cultural beliefs. 1.5 RESULTS QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS The questionnaire surveys conducted in three local villages provided vital information regarding the attitudes towards and use and capture of sea turtles on Gau. As the population lives predominantly in coastal areas, locals depend heavily on the marine environment for their diet. Fishing is therefore a major activity within their daily lives and is largely indiscriminate. Local Fijians will consume almost everything within their catch and it was established, through preliminary research, that they also eat sea turtle. Traditionally only the high chief of the island would consume turtle meat in accordance with traditional ceremonies; however, it is now acceptable for everyone to eat turtle meat at any given opportunity and people will often use specific fishing methods to achieve this. The locals of Gau use one of two specific methods in order to harvest turtles. The first is the use of reinforced seine nets. Once a turtle is observed, the net is quickly placed to block the likely escape path that the turtle will take out of the reef. Disturbance by noise and beating of the boat and water is then started close to the shore or the other side of the reef and continues as the fishing party advances, driving the turtle towards the turtle nets in place, where they subsequently become entangled (Veitayaki 1995). The second method used is to simply free-dive with spears or to collect the turtles during the night while they sleep under ledges or crevices. Frontier Fiji 82

99 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report TURTLE WARDENS A Turtle Warden Training workshop was held in September 27. Representatives from all 18 communities on the island attended, and 18 individuals were designated as Turtle Warden for their communities. Meme Laveti from the IMR aided in the workshop and helped to disseminate information to the participants. The wardens were schooled in turtle life cycles, identification, importance to global marine ecology and conservation, and threats. The wardens were given educational material that could be distributed within their respective villages so that they could act as an information conduit to all inhabitants of the island. Through the agreement with the island council, the wardens were given the mandate to record turtle sightings and identify turtle nesting sites during the nesting season. The wardens were also given the materials by which to do this. In the long term this will aid monitoring of turtle populations on the island, and help to build community awareness of turtle conservation SCHOOL WORKSHOPS An environmental education programme was prepared which could be used effectively to disseminate information to primary and secondary schools about the status, ecology, biology and conservation of turtles. Advice was also sought from IMR, WWF and SPREP. These organisations provided educational materials for distribution in schools, including turtle calendars, stickers, posters and education packs. Frontier-Fiji prepared visual aids and games to use in presentations to school children. Given that a majority of the children were of primary school age and had little knowledge of English, the presentations were highly visual and interactive and included: posters of both hawksbill and green turtles with information on each species, presentations using educational material designed by Frontier-Fiji and other aforementioned organisations, and a game designed to reinforce the information provided to the participants. Frontier Fiji 83

100 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report PROGRAMME FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS TOPICS AND GAMES Introduction and Status of Current Turtle populations in the World, Fiji and Gau Types, Habitat and Food of Turtles Separation into groups (Green, Loggerhead, Leatherback, Hawksbill, Olive Ridley) Life cycle of Turtles Life Cycle Action Game Value of Turtles Threats to Turtle population Threats Quiz Threats British Bulldog Style Game What you can do to help conserve turtle populations Turtle Quiz Prize Giving Table 1.2 Topics and games conducted within a typical workshop with primary school children. The education programme began with an introduction to the students and teachers about the turtle programme and the aims and objectives of Frontier- Fiji. The students were then introduced to the different species of turtles found in the South Pacific, and split into teams, each of which was named after a turtle. Frontier-Fiji volunteers joined a team and effectively became their team captain. The teams were to compete with each other for points and a prize at the end of the day. The volunteers worked excellently to increase the enthusiasm for their turtle species and team. The student groups were then taught the lifecycle of the turtles and each different section of the life cycle was given an action. A member of Frontier- Fiji staff then shouted out an aspect of the life cycle and the students, in their teams, had to perform the action. The team to perform their action first won a point. Following this, the students were taught the value and threats to turtles. Each team then had to shout out the threats, natural or man-made and were awarded points appropriately. The students were then taken outside. There Frontier-Fiji staff and volunteers assumed roles as a threat (e.g. plastic bags or crabs) and instructed the students to run from one side of the playing field, which represented a beach, to the other side, which represented the sea. The volunteers and Staff then tagged the students and those remaining won a point for their team. To finish, the students were told what they could do to help prevent the decline of turtle populations and were given a quiz before prize-giving. At the end of the presentations, games and quizzes, Frontier-Fiji gave the teachers and head teachers a variety of posters and education packs which we used in our presentations so that they could continue to educate the students on the same topics PROGRAMME FOR THE SECONDARY SCHOOL Frontier Fiji 84

101 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 In the secondary schools, a more mature approach was taken to develop an education programme with more detail and discussion involved, given their higher level of English and scientific learning. Table 1.3, below depicts the approach used in the secondary school. TOPICS AND GAMES Introduction and Status of Current Turtle populations in the World, Fiji and Gau Types, Habitat and Food of Turtles Separation into groups (Green, Loggerhead, Leatherback, Hawksbill, Olive Ridley) Discussions of laws and conservation using scenarios to aid discussion Lifecycle Value of Turtles Threats to Turtle population Threats Quiz True or false game What you can do to help conserve turtle populations Turtle Quiz Prize Giving Table 1.3 Itinerary for secondary school workshops 1.6 DISCUSSION When working within traditional governance systems such as that which is in operation on the island of Gau, it is important to recognise that one must respect this system. To that end Frontier-Fiji had to consult widely within the communities of the island in order to initiate this project. Without the support of the Lomani Gau this project would not have been possible, and if permission had not been given a major cultural offence would have been committed. With the support gained from the Lomani Gau it was possible to gain wide participation within the communities on the island. Therefore, although this project had a very modest budget, its impact can be seen in all 18 communities on the island, and therefore the awareness achieved among the local communities is a success in itself. By targeting the ten schools (nine primary and one secondary) and giving the teachers educational materials, support and ideas regarding turtle ecology and conservation, the immediate impact of the project lies with the younger generation, who may not have been raised with the traditional beliefs that surround turtles on the island (see above). The training of turtle wardens from each of the eighteen communities on the island aided in the dissemination of relevant information regarding turtle conservation to all island inhabitants. Subsequent information collected by the wardens will also help to monitor the island s breeding population. The warden s role as an information source for communities also allows the information regarding turtle conservation to reach all of Gau inhabitants. This project has directly helped to achieve the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy by: Raising awareness of turtle conservation among the communities on Gau Disseminating information and knowledge to stakeholders of all generations Working in partnership with UOP, IMR, WWF and SPERP and local communities Frontier Fiji 85

102 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Training Turtle Wardens to actively help enforce current international legislation Actively promoting conservation in order to change attitudes towards turtles Protecting and monitoring nesting sites on the island through the actions of the Turtle Wardens. It must be mentioned that at no point did Frontier-Fiji contradict or ban traditional turtle consumption; rather it was more of a reinforcing of the traditional beliefs and practises established by the islanders ancestors. In conclusion, this project has been an outstanding success, with wide participation, active awareness raising, support of traditional governance and practises and actively initiating a community-based conservation strategy that adheres to all cultural considerations. Frontier Fiji 86

103 11. INVESTIGATION INTO ARTISINAL FISHING METHODS AND CATCH COMPOSITION DAVID COOPER, DEBBIE WINTON & SARA SIDDIG 11.1 AIM To document by interview and observation the fishing methods used by the Fijians in two villages on western Gau and to count, measure and identify individual fish caught on fishing trips. To map popular fishing areas and gather information on catch per unit effort OBJECTIVES 1) Join local fishermen/women on fishing trips to directly observe fishing methods used. 2) Count, measure length of and identify to species level, every fish caught on fishing trips being observed. 3) Record GPS co-ordinates of fishing locations to map the areas and collect information on length and frequency of trips to calculate catch per unit effort INTRODUCTION The various fishing methods used around the Fiji Islands have been well documented (Veitayaki, 1997), but no information as yet has been recorded on which of these techniques are utilised around Gau. The overall project goals of Frontier-Fiji include monitoring any changes in fish abundance inside and outside of the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) of Gau Island. The research emphasis has, until now, been on direct observation of fish underwater, but any changes that may be occurring in the success of fishing in the area were not being monitored. As the original reason for implementation of the MPAs by the villages is to increase fish abundance for sustainable fishing, this data is imperative in deducing the impact of the MPAs METHODOLOGY SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS Data collection took the form of semi-structured interviews in which a set of nonleading questions (table 11.1) was developed, based around a template tried and tested in the field by Frontier-Madagascar. The villages of Somosomo, Nawaikama, Sawaieke and Levuka were visited over a 4-week period and 3-6 hours spent in each village questioning villagers in an informal setting. People were interviewed individually by two Research Assistants where possible, but occasionally language barriers meant that there was more than one subject being interviewed. Questions were not asked sequentially, but as part of general conversation. The conversation continued until as may of the questions as possible had been answered.

104 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 PERSONAL DETAILS Name Education Level Age Fishing Area Place of Residence Years of Fishing Marital status Number of children FISHING LOCATIONS 1) In what sectors of the lagoon do you fish? 2) Why do you fish these areas? 3) How long have you been fishing there? 4) Who else fishes there? FISHING PRACTICES 5) What fish species do you catch? Do you catch anything other than fish? 6) Why do you catch these fish? 7) How many days a week do you fish? 8) Which days do you fish? 9) How long do you fish for at a time? 1) Do you fish all year round? 11) What types of fishing gear do you use? i.e. spear, line, net 12) Have your fishing techniques changed over the years? 13) What do you do with the fish you catch? i.e. eat, sell, give away 14) Do you ever throw fish back? If so, why? 15) On average, how many kg of fish do you catch? 16) Do you sell any of your catch? If so, where? CATCH 17) Has your catch size changed at all? 18) If so, in what way? Has fish size increased/decreased or stayed the same? 19) Are there fewer different types of fish? 2) What would you do to increase your catch? Where would you go? 21) Do you feel that the MPAs have made an impact on the fishing community? If so, has it been positive or negative? 22) Do you feel the MPAs will benefit future generations or have no effect? 23) Are you worried or optimistic about fishing in the future? Table 11.1 Fishing questionnaire questions FISHING TRIPS Local fishermen and women were taken out on 23ft fibreglass boats with 4hp engines, owned and driven by Frontier-Fiji staff. Directions for where to fish were given by local fishers. Locations of fishing sites were recorded using a handheld GPS unit. The fishing techniques used by the fishers were recorded in detail. Additional information recorded included time of day fishing started and finished, day/date, weather conditions (cloud cover, wind direction and strength, sea state) and number of fishers. Each fish caught was identified to species level using Lieske & Myers (21) as an identification guide, measured to the nearest.5cm using a standard tape measure and tallied. Data was recorded onto previously prepared dive slates using Frontier Fiji 88

105 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 pencil. At the end of the trip, total time spent fishing was recorded and location of the end point recorded using the GPS RESULTS SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS A total of 25 questionnaires were carried out; three in Sawaieke, four in Levuka, thirteen in Nawaikama and five in Somosomo. Specific visits were organised to Nawaikama and Somosomo for carrying out the questionnaires, whereas those in Sawaieke and Levuka were carried out during satellite camps. Five of the interviewees were male, 19 were female, and one was a mother and son together. The data for 19 of the interviews has been collated from survey staff so far FISHING LOCATIONS From all villages, interviewees named their local bay as their usual site for fishing, and most also fish at the barrier reef occasionally, particularly in Sawaieke where the barrier reef joins the fringing reef and is therefore close to access easily. Many have fished in the same area all their lives. The general opinion of the right to fish in these bays was that people from nearby villages are welcome because many are related and they share resources. However, almost every interviewee mentioned boats coming from Suva, or from other islands (namely nearby islands of Nairai, Batiki & Beqa) who come to fish on the barrier reef at night, often using snorkels & spear guns, to sell to Suva. No-one thought they had any right to fish there SPECIES CAUGHT When asked which fish they caught, most interviewees said they did not target particular species in any way other than selecting a certain size of line or mesh size for their net and would keep any species that happened to bite or get trapped. Species named include parrotfish, surgeonfish, snappers, goatfish, triggerfish, barracuda, shark, grouper, sweetlips, trevally, sharks, wrasse & squirrelfish. Parrotfish are caught more when net fishing, and the larger the line and hook, the larger the fish caught. Barracuda were said to be only ever caught using a line, mullet are caught in the mangroves using nets and goatfish and sharks were also specifically mentioned as caught using nets. At the barrier reef, they will use larger lines and hooks as the fish there are known to be larger. Spear fishers however are selective, targeting the larger species, catching walu (Spanish mackerel), surgeonfish, eels and rabbitfish. Many of the interviewees said turtles and sea cucumbers are also caught. Only the men catch turtles and the shells are sold to Suva, especially hotels. Some denied that turtles are caught on the island. All that admitted fishing for turtles occurred said that it was purely opportunistic and they were not targeted. Sea cucumbers were highlighted as a good source of income, also sold to Suva TIME SPENT FISHING Frontier Fiji 89

106 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Most interviewees fished from one to three days a week, although some fish up to six days a week, the most popular day was Saturdays, followed by Fridays and Tuesdays but nobody fished on a Sunday. Big trips often occur on Fridays and Saturdays in preparation for Sunday meals. They fish during day and night, with night often stated to be better for larger fish. Length of time fishing varied from one hour to all day or all night. Men spear fishing only fished for two to three hours because it is tiring and if fishing at night they are limited by the length of their torch battery life. Many said that they fished as long as was needed to catch enough EQUIPMENT Lines and nets are commonly used, especially by women. Lines can be weighted and different sizes are used, with a variety of hook sizes to catch different sized fish. Only the men use spear guns some have masks and wetsuits. Different sized spear guns are used. One interviewee described a method used to herd fish into a big group, using coconut leaves and splashing water at low tide at the barrier reef. Motor boats are used, especially at night (when torches and benzene lamps used), although not often because of the cost. Punting and use of rafts (bilibili) is common. Small fish, prawns, hermit crabs (kasikasi) and octopus were all named as used for bait. All those who answered whether their fishing techniques had changed over the years said no, except for the use of motorboats enabling them to go further AMOUNT OF CATCH Answers for the amount of fish caught on any one trip ranged from 2-1kg and 5-3 fish. Spear fishers gave larger numbers or amounts in kilograms than those using lines and nets. Fish up to 1.5m are caught. It was often said that the catch depended on the weather and that bigger catches occurred at night WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CATCH Fishing purely for subsistence to feed the family was common. A number mentioned that if a trevally was caught, it is to be given to the Chief as he is the only person allowed to eat it. Thirteen interviewees said they did sell some of their fish and three did not. Only the men fished specifically to sell, but the women would sell fish if they had extra. They mostly sold to the local schools or fellow villagers. One interviewee sold fish to the tourist boats that visit the island (Nai a and Aggressor Livaboards) and one to the supply boat the Navigator, to take to Suva. Sea cucumbers and turtle shells are sold to Suva CHANGES TO SIZE OF CATCH Ten people said that the size of their catch had changed, and all said that the change was an increase or that it was easier to catch more fish. Only three said that fish size had increased, but these were the only interviewees to answer that question. Two of the interviewees had noticed new species that they previously would not catch in the Frontier Fiji 9

107 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 same area, saying this has occurred since the MPAs were created. Nukuyaweni, Nagali and the southern side of Nawaikama Bay were all stated as good areas to go if people wanted a larger catch, but this question was not readily answered EFFECT OF THE MPAS AND THE FUTURE Eleven of the thirteen said that the MPAs have had a positive effect on the fish population of Gau, stating both an increase in size and abundance of fish as well as fishing becoming easier. There were no statements of a negative effect. Five people agreed that the MPAs should be kept, but no-one said that they should not be kept. Nearly everyone (twelve of the thirteen) stated that they were not worried about the future as there would always be enough fish DISCUSSION The ratio of male to female interviewees was skewed towards females. In the future, it would be ideal to have a more even ratio as men and women use different methods to fish, partly due to cultural reasons. For example, spear fishing is only ever done by men, whereas the women are more likely to fish using a line than men are. During a de-briefing session, Research Assistants involved in carrying out the questionnaires had some feedback for how to make the process easier and to get more reliable results. It was suggested that use of a dictaphone might make a conversation flow more naturally and may put the interviewee more at ease than writing down answers to the questions. The original set of questions included a large section of questions to which the interviewee had to answer agree or disagree. During the first questionnaire session these questions proved too complicated as interviewees did not understand what was expected of them, so they were subsequently removed from the questionnaire. Although the interviews were all conducted on an informal basis, it was noted that people were more accommodating in answering the questions when the meetings had been arranged in advance (in Somosomo and Nawaikama), rather than on satellite camps when houses were chosen at random and people asked on-the-spot if they would mind being asked a few questions. Some language difficulties were encountered, particularly with regards to the names of fish and terminology for MPAs. It was suggested that a reference list of relevant Fijian words be drawn up to ease communication. The language barrier also proved difficult when trying to make the questions asked non-leading, as sometimes it was necessary to give examples of answers when the question was not fully understood. This is a common problem encountered for research around the world when interviewing in a foreign language and can only be noted and taken into account when analysing results. In the future, it is suggested that the project broaden slightly to record other data in the villages. Recording the number of boats in each village, and their motor power (if any) would provide an idea of the fishing potential of that village. Nets set up for a number of days in bays are a common method of fishing in the area, but the current project did not document this. With regards to net fishing, information on the size of the net, the size of the mesh of the net, the length of time they are left for, how frequently they are checked and the size, species and a count of the catch would all be valuable data to collect. Frontier Fiji 91

108

109 12. FARMING PRACTICES 12.1 INTRODUCTION NICK MOSS & LUCY GWEN GILLIS Agriculture is the single largest economic sector in Fiji accounting for 43% of Fiji s foreign exchange earnings and employs half the population. Subsistence agriculture accounts for 67% of this labour force. The rural farming economy is based in indigenous Fijian villages where community decision making, resource allocation and management are founded on subsistence, with limited technology and a high degree of environmental knowledge. Rural farmers tend to have several sources of livelihoods, and households tend to have a wage earner but also grow food and cash crops. The main cash crops grown in Fiji are coconuts, ginger, cassava, taro, kava, bananas and breadfruit. In recent times the government has been keen to promote a greater diversity of cash crops. In Fijian villages the people depend on their surroundings for sustenance but islands are dependent on trade for outside luxuries. This is never more visible on the island of Gau, where the infrequent arrival of supply boats often dictates that villagers must provide for themselves from the land and sea. However in recent times Fijian village s subsistence and self sufficiency have been replaced by semi commercial activities, while communal labour and ownership have been replaced by paid labour and individually owned ventures. This increased economic dependence on cash crops has meant farming expansion and expansion of once sustainable practices with little knowledge and guidance as to what the effects of these practices may be on the terrestrial and marine environment. At one time most of Fiji was forest-covered. Steady slash and burn forms of agriculture removed most of the forest cover in the western dry zones of the main islands. On the island of Viti Levu, which with an area of 1,388 square kilometres - amounts to 56.7% of Fiji s 18,3 square kilometres, soil is being washed away at rates estimated by Japanese experts to total 9.3 millions tons a year in the Rewa river watershed area, 6.4 million tons in the Ba watershed area, 4.2 million tons in the Nadi watershed area, and 1.1 million tons in the Sigatoka area. Soil flows into lagoons to obliterate coral and marine life. Poor farming and engineering practices have made soil erosion a national issue, one that can no longer be ignored. Slash and burn is an agricultural system used in tropical countries in which the forest is cut, debris is burned and the land is then used to grow crops. It is the leading cause of tropical deforestation. This is the same method used on Gau, and although the plots are often very small there are many people conducting the practice. It leads to vigorous development of weeds and loss of nutrients. It means plots often have to be left fallow leading to increased erosion and surface runoff and consequently increased levels of marine sedimentation. In tropical forests the soil is often very infertile due to great age, a high level of precipitation leading to leaching and the moist climate which encourages decomposition of organic matter. It is often sustainable if the population is small and the land is cleared for subsistence and not cash crops. One of the major threats to the environment on the island of Gau comes from agricultural expansion. Farming practices and increasing areas of farming are leading to threats to both the terrestrial and marine environment. In the last three to four years

110 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 there has been a movement from subsistence based agriculture to cash crops, leading to much larger areas of land cleared and increased use of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers and increased erosion and runoff leading to higher levels of sediment in the water column (Interview). It was then our aim to interview the farmers in each village to ascertain the current level of farming, the changes in faming practices which have occurred and the threats to the coral reefs of farming expansion METHODOLOGY A set of non leading questions was developed with which to interview farmers. The villages of Somosomo, Nawaikama, Sawaieke and Levuka were visited over a four week period and 1-2 hours spent in each village questioning villagers in an informal setting. People were interviewed individually where possible (language difficulties occasionally made this impossible), by two Frontier RAs. Questions were not asked sequentially, but as part of general conversation. The conversation continued until as may of the questions as possible had been answered. In Nawaikama we visited a number of the farms taking notes on their locations, methods used, type of crops grown, proximity to the ocean and any other areas of interest. We then informally interviewed farmers at each of the locations RESULTS AND DISCUSSION During 73 seven people in three different villages in Gau, Nawaikama, Sawaieke and Somosomo, were interviewed, and we visited three farms in the Nawaikama district. A large majority of the farming which takes place on Gau is at the moment subsistence based. Interviewees estimated 4% of the island is covered in agriculture if you include the plantations of pine which they have in the South of the island. Farms are small, about one to two acres in size, and situated on steep hillsides. Plots are cleared largely through slash and burn techniques, with some interviewees claiming that they use slash and rot techniques. In Nawaikama a farmer must obtain a burning permit from the village council, before they can start any slash and burn activities. The head man of the village (Turaga ni Koro) will then grant or deny permission for such an activity based on the circumstances, location of the site and size of the site. Community members then create a fire break in the designated area to prevent the fire from spreading and thus keep the slash and burn to the prescribed area. However, illegal slash and burn still goes on in the area and in other areas the slash and burn is largely uncontrolled (pers. obs.) Farming is done manually with simple tools such as spades and forks with limited evidence of mechanised machinery such as motorised ploughs and chainsaws. In Nawaikama they have recently cleared a large area of land to grow cash crops for sale in Suva. The land will be worked by five to ten men and income will be contributed towards community projects. This is the first evidence of large scale agriculture that we have seen. Frontier Fiji 94

111 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Farms are usually managed by a single male, or a few males from a single family. If the farmer has other engagements, then the community will nominate individuals to help manage and maintain the farm. Farmers grow a variety of crops on their farms and there is no specialisation. All farmers interviewed grow cassava, dalo (taro) and rourou (taro leaves), whilst some of the farmers interviewed and those visited, grew pumpkin, cabbage, chillies, papaya, bananas, watermelon and ginger. All crops grown are seasonal and farmers practice shifting cultivation and crop rotation. Location of the farms is chosen based on soil type and usually in the most fertile areas, but to a certain extent is opportunistic and based on accessibility. Ownership of the land is divided between different clans (mataqali) but new farmers can farm where they chose as long as they have permission of the clan who the land belongs to. Interviewees have stated that there is some limited use of fertilisers and herbicides on farms and we observed used containers of herbicides. One interviewee claimed that the Ministry of Agriculture initially recommended the use of fertilisers, but has since recommended the ceasing of fertilisers. There are no prevalent pests on the island. Another interviewee claimed that the community is trying to dissuade farmers from using fertilizers as the crops are worth more if they are organically grown. None of the interviewees claimed to use natural fertilisers such as manures as there is not a large amount of livestock. Farming is largely subsistence based but some farmers have started to grow for sale. Kava and Dalo are the two main cash crops, with kava being sold in Suva, whilst the Dalo is usually sold in Suva for export overseas. Demand for this crop comes from Fijian immigrants in the USA, New Zealand and Asian countries. Kava which has been grown and taken to Suva for sale for the last 2 years and is one of the predominant cash crops. We have also observed government boats coming to the island to collect copra. Interviewees claimed that they and the communities understood the interaction between the farming practices and the oceans and what effects practices such as slash and burn can cause increased sedimentation and smother the reefs. However a personal observation is that this is either not adhered to or they simply don t understand and their answers are simply biased due to our position in the community. We have seen large evidence of slash and burn agriculture with massive areas of uncontrolled burning taking place in each of the villages in which we conducted interviews. We have seen massive areas decimated due to slash and burn during this phase, at the beginning of the planting season. The effects of the actions seem to be understood by the villagers that we spoke to but, they seem to be more enlightened than some of their fellow farmers who continue these practices. In the early 9 s there was some workshops conducted by WWF on the negative effects of slash and burn agriculture and alternatives. They also explained just how actions on the land affect the marine environment DISCUSSION The people that we interviewed led us to believe that there is an increasing pressure in the island economy to move from subsistence agriculture to cash crops. This pressure is exacerbated by the lack of island industry and increasing westernization leading to Frontier Fiji 95

112 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 social pressure for acquiring luxury goods. This pressure is leading to larger and larger tracts of land to be cleared for agriculture as we have seen in Nawaikama. The economic demand for only a limited type of crops has meant that there is an increasing shift to monoculture and increased pressure to use fertilizers and pesticides SLASH AND BURN Slash and burn agriculture and shifting cultivation has been used in tropical countries for thousands of years and is a sustainable form of agriculture on a small scale. However on a larger scale it can lead to massive deforestation and erosion. In Gau the farms are often located on very steep slopes and the high levels of rainfall have lead to large amounts of sedimentation. The lagoon on the Western side of the island also causes poor currents and means sediments remain in the water column for longer. Corals cannot proliferate in unclear and heavily sedimented waters. They require clear waters in which sunlight can penetrate in order to allow the zooxanthellae to carry out photosynthesis FERTILISERS Increased industrialization of agriculture is already leading to increased use of fertilizers and pesticide. The predominant fertilizer is NPK. Corals grow best in oligotrophic waters, where algae cannot grow to out-compete their growth and recruitment. Increased use of fertilisers and runoff from deforestation has the potential to increase nutrient levels in the waters and increase levels of macroalgae CONCLUSION The current level of agriculture on the island of Gau is largely subsistence based but there is increasing pressure on farmers to shift to cash crops in order to supplement income. Higher levels of farming induced by cash cropping will create a number of pressures on the reef ecosystem, increasing erosion and runoff and increasing nutrient levels in the water. At the time of writing this report there were also plans to build a new jetty in the North of the island which will lead to greater transport links. This will increase trade with the larger more developed islands and increase pressure on local subsistence farmers to introduce cash crops. The socioeconomic questionnaires have given us an idea of the types and extent of agriculture taking place on the western side of the island. However without further analysis and monitoring it is difficult to truly ascertain whether there is a direct link to increased agriculture and reef degradation. However it is clear from case studies in other coastal communities that these processes place pressure on the reefs. Community educational initiatives are needed to reinforce good farming practices which are sustainable and low impact FUTURE WORK In the future the socioeconomic questionnaires on farming could include the following: Frontier Fiji 96

113 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Correlation with the sedimentation and coral coverage in front of farming areas by setting up sediment traps in farming and non farming locations. Water sampling tests for nitrates and phosphates. Interviews with villages further away and with more farmers. More visits to farms to record details of their location and environmental conditions. Frontier Fiji 97

114

115 13. CONSERVATION, COMMUNITY AND THE CHIEF: A CASE STUDY OF COMMUNITY BASED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TOMASO LISCA The complete dissertation by Tomaso Lisca, presented as a BA thesis to Kings College, London is available to view on the Frontier website, the abstract and key conclusions are presented here in this report as this has been an insightful contribution to the socio-economic analysis and discourse in Gau ABSTRACT In an effort to counter rapid resource depletion and the environmental degradation of the marine environments crucial to the livelihoods of the communities of Gau Island, Fiji, several Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been set up following much of the same principles as the predominant conservation paradigm, Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM). This case study uses a range of qualitative research methods to investigate the perceived benefits of the MPAs in four villages in Gau. It goes on to address the degree to which these MPAs can be said to be community-based, challenging commonly used definitions of CBNRM DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This research indicates that the MPAs established in the sites studied have brought tangible ecological and socio-economic benefits to the communities that are managing them. Though the ecological benefits of the MPAs have not been directly measured as part of this analysis (the NGO 'Frontier' is currently undertaking research into these, see Fanning et al. 26), all the participants in this study perceived an increase in the relative size and abundance of marine fauna. As a result, the participants reported considerable economic gains; catches have increased, raising each individual's income by an average of 7 Fijian $ per month for women and 32 Fijian $ per month for men. Thus, the livelihood benefits of the scheme have been considerable. Furthermore, the perceived Catch per Unit Effort has increased dramatically in Somosomo, Sawaieke and Qarani and moderately in Nawaikama; respondents discussed the increase in their free time as a result of this as a great social benefit. Whilst every respondent in this research had a positive perception of the MPA, adhering to it rules and participating in its daily management, this research suggests that the decision making phase, that took place before the MPAs were established, was not community-based. The decision to declare MPAs on the North-Western side of the island seems to have been taken by Takalai Gau, the paramount chief of Gau Island, and his advisers (lower-ranking chiefs and the island's elders) and successively passed down to the communities. This dominance of traditional authority and immense respect awarded to high-ranking chiefs is a characteristic intrinsic to rural indigenous Fijian society (Toren 199, 1999) and is not unusual, similar examples are found in West Africa (Marfo, 27; Uphoff, 1998). The decisionmaking processes uncovered in this research challenge the commonly understood definition of CBNRM in its emphasis on the participation of the whole

116 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 community in decision-making. The understanding of CBNRM within the cultural context of indigenous Fijian society varies greatly, where important decisions are made solely by the chief, and left entirely unquestioned by the remainder of the community. The communities actively participate in the management of the MPA, but the decision-making at the start-up of the MPAs have not been participatory. Thus whilst it may not empower, in the form of giving those with traditionally less power the opportunity to participate in decision-making, and it is very much embedded within traditional power structures, it does involve their participation at the operational level. This contests commonly used definitions of CBNRM which emphasise empowerment and participation, such as the definitions of Kumar (25) and Pomeroy et al. (1996). The loyalty to the chief maintained by all participants may belie conflictual interactions at various levels, but regardless of this, the communities studied all stated great benefits from the MPA. The complexities of navigating the loyalty to Takalai Gau, Gau Island's paramount chief, and exposing the true nature of people's perceptions to CBNRM have not been dealt with, owing to limited time and funding available for this research. There is no evidence however to suggest that the MPA has further entrenched traditionally unequal power structures within the village communities studied; rather it has been imposed around these existing structures. A further in-depth study examining the impact of the MPA on the micro level power structures within these field areas would no doubt be of great interest, this would be particularly so were it to apply a gender perspective in light of the predominance of women as fishers. Whilst not actively breaking down unequal power structures, the MPA is imposed as a blanket-scheme, covering all members of the community equally, goes some way to ensuring deeper fissures within the community are not generated. This case study therefore poses a challenge to those who argue that CBNRM should encompass positive livelihood and environmental outcomes as a result of more sustainable natural resource use, bound up with a challenge to traditional hierarchical systems and the empowerment of communities. Within this example, positive livelihood and environmental change has occurred as a result of the MPAs without a concerted effort to break down traditional power structures. Further, the discussion given here goes some way towards questioning the premise that empowerment, as a process, is something which should be ascribed to individuals. This Eurocentric notion fails to account for the empowerment of a community as a whole. Whilst the MPAs in Gau were decided upon and initiated by a few key leaders, the chiefs were given the power to make such a decision free from the control of government or an international, or other, NGO. In this way, the MPAs in Gau could be argued to be a form of CBNRM which, though failing to address micro power structures and empower the individuals in a community, has successfully addressed meso and macro power structures, by devolving natural resource management to the chiefs, thus empowering the communities as a whole. A strong, respected leadership is recognised as an important factor in the success of CBNRM initiatives (Muehlig-Hoffmann, 27), it would be unrealistic to suggest that within the relatively short time frame in which the MPAs have been in existence, a significant breakdown of traditional power structures could occur without creating great conflict within the communities. What is more, were such an outcome to have Frontier Fiji 1

117 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 been perused at the outset, the ensuing conflict might have be detrimental to both livelihoods and sustainable natural resource use. Langton et al. (25) advise that traditional governance processes, such as the decision-making powers awarded solely to the chief in Gau Island, should be recognised and respected. They argue that indigenous communities, such as the inhabitants of Gau Island, should be free to draw from their own societal hierarchy for the decision-making processes and protocols needed to manage common-property natural resources. By working within traditional power and decision-making structures, the MPAs have achieved no mean feat by improving livelihoods through sustainable natural resource use. Murphee (22) argues that CBNRM failures have often been due to a poor implementation of schemes, especially when authority and responsibility has not been devolved to local levels. Such a concern is not relevant here; the devolution of authority to the chiefs has worked particularly well. Moreover, by working within traditional societal structures, the MPAs have succeeded in ensuring compliance and adherence to rules due to the degree of respect and loyalty given to the chiefs. The power of social norms, as a part of a community's social capital, that act as self-regulatory mechanism as discussed by Young (1996) are evident within this conformity to MPA rules. Whilst it has been argued that CBNRMs two key objectives, conservation and development, are inherently incompatible (Redford and Saunderson, 2), this study has shown that in fact the two can be reconciled. It remains to be seen, however, as the pace of development increases whether such a coexistence of these two ideals is in fact sustainable. Participant observation during this period of fieldwork indicated an ever increasing pace of modernisation within the communities. In particular, the researcher was shown with great pride newly installed flushing toilet systems, which have come to be seen as somewhat of a status symbol within the villages studied. Whilst this is undoubtedly an indication of a positive development process in the impact such systems have on the sanitisation of the villages, and thus the health of their communities, a failure to account for such land-based changes on the marine environment may lead to a rapid degradation of the progress already made by the MPAs. Eutrophication caused by untreated sewage and sedimentation caused by poor land management would severely disrupt the ecological balance of the coral reefs that the MPA is there to protect (Frontier-Fiji, 26). Such an argument highlights the need for further research, and corresponding action closely involving the communities of Gau, into these rapidly changing human and physical environments. Frontier Fiji 11

118

119 14. CONCLUSION The research carried out in Gau in 27 built on the baseline reef surveys assessing key indicators of reef health on the fringing reefs of Gau. In addition the foundations were laid for a more detailed analysis of other marine organisms such as soft coral and holothurians. Socio-economic surveys and capacity building work in the communities again developed from initial studies in 26, tying together the ecological and social systems. There is a general trend of increasingly degraded habitat from north to south, with lower levels of hard coral as well as reef fish abundance and diversity. Reefs adjacent to villages with higher populations were found to have lower hard coral cover, despite evidence pointing towards equal rates of coral recruitment and growth, suggesting anthropogenic factors directly resulting in the poorer health of the reefs. The reefs around Somosomo and Nukuyaweni were the most pristine. These areas had the highest levels of hard coral cover and the greatest fish abundance and diversity. Somosomo and Nukuyaweni had the lowest associated populations. The reefs adjacent to Nukuloa and Levuka were found to be the most degraded with high levels of silt, lower hard coral coverage and fish abundance and diversity. However, more data is needed from these areas to fill in gaps, particularly at the shallower depths, to obtain a more complete picture of the condition of these reefs and the stressors. Monitoring would have to continue to ascertain whether the MPAs are effective and having a positive effect on the abundance and diversity of the reef biota and on reef fish numbers, but fishers are reporting greater catches than prior to the implementation of the no take zones, which is a positive sign. The fishers interviewed generally supported the creation and designation of the MPAs as a result of the increase in catch. Eight species of holothurians were identified in the shallow waters close to Naviavia. Further studies are underway to establish current and historic fishing practices and economic importance of holothurians to the islanders. The SCRAP procedure was developed over the course of 72 to quickly identify and quantify abundance, diversity and distribution of soft corals. Seagrass Watch was continued from 26, with calls for systematic monitoring every six months to monitor changes in coverage and species composition. In addition lower levels of seagrass coverage were found in front of Naviavia where the dive boats were passing; therefore a delineated path for boats was suggested. Capacity building in 27 took the form of a sea-turtle conservation awareness project supported by Project PADI-AWARE. Workshops on sea-turtle ecology and conservation were carried out in all the schools and wardens from all the villages were trained with the aid of the University of the South Pacific (USP) to monitor sea-turtle populations. Preliminary socio-economic surveys have confirmed fisheries and agriculture are largely for subsistence. People tend to fish in the reefs adjacent to their villages, which supports the findings of decreasing fish abundances further south of the island.

120 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 There is a gender division in the operation of the fisheries, with women fishing primarily for subsistence and selling any extra, and men fishing for the purpose of sale. Most of the fish was sold within Gau, to other villagers and the schools. However some was sold to live-aboard dive boats which pass through the area. It is likely that land-based anthropogenic factors will create greater stress on the reefs in the future as the pressure to move from subsistence farming towards cash crops increases to supplement income. Therefore good agricultural practices will need to be encouraged to prevent further damage to the reef structure and fisheries. As there are many aspects of Gau which make it unique in terms of governance, community structure, land tenureship and crucially lack of large scale development. As the communities have tenureship of the land and marine resources, they are in the unique position of having awareness of the decline of their fish stocks and having the power to change land based agricultural practices which impact these resources. The majority of fisheries are for subsistence, as is the agriculture, but an increasing trend of sale of goods such as kava has been witnessed. As Gau is still very remote, due to its poor connections with other Fijian islands, this has limited the stakeholders to the inhabitants of the island, making management plans easier to construct, implement and monitor. As marine resource management is far less complex here than in the majority of tropical coastal areas, this essentially negates the need of external mediation, which is why external governance structures are so important in other areas. The traditional social structure is still very cohesive, which ensures compliance to MPA rules due to the respect and loyality commanded by the chiefs. This is something which is reasonably common throughout the South Pacific, so it is feasible that this model of community-based management could be replicable in areas with similar underlying social/ governance structures. The research from 27 leads into many avenues for further work; with more baseline data needed from areas further from the Frontier-Fiji base in Naviavia, on the north coast, degraded areas especially Nukuloa and Levuka, and the eastern fringing reefs. The creation of a longitudinal database or GIS would also greatly help with analysis of physical as well as socioeconomic data and would be a useful tool when disseminating information to the local communities as well as the wider research community. Frontier Fiji 14

121 15. REFERENCES Baird, A.H., Marshal, P.A. 22 Mortality, growth and reproduction in sclerectinian corals following bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 237: Biddick, K., Brown, LF., Markham, H., Mayhew, EM., Robertson, A., Smith, V., 26. A field manual for survey methods in tropical marine ecosystems. Society for Environmental Exploration, UK and L Institut Halieutique et des Sciences Marines, Toliara. Brown, B.E Coral bleaching: causes and consequences. Coral Reefs 16: S129- S138 Brown L.F., Weaver D., Fanning E., 27. An Initial Assessment of the fringing reefs of Western Gau. Frontier-Fiji Environmental Research Report 1. Society for Environmental Exploration, UK and the International Ocean Institute Pacific Islands. Brown, B.E., Ogden, J.E., 1993 Coral Bleaching. Scientific American 268(1): 64-7 Campbell, S.J., Pardede, S.T. 26 Reef fish structure and cascading effects in response to artisanal fishing pressure. Fisheries Research 79: Darwall, W.R.T., Dulvy, N.K., An evaluation of the suitability of non-specialist volunteer researchers for coral reef fish surveys. Mafia Island, Tanzania a case study. Biological Conservation 78: Darwall, W.R.T., Guard, M., Dulvy, N., Whittington, M., Choiseul, V., 1997 Manual of Biological and Resource Use Survey Methods for Tropical Marine Ecosystems Society for Environmental Exploration, London and the University of Dar es Salaam. Douglas, A.E. 23 Coral bleaching how and why? Marine Pollution Bulletin 46: Evans, N. 26. Natural Resources and the environment in Fiji: A review of existing and proposed legislation. Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme Technical Report. Fiji Department of Fisheries; Fiji Department of Environment through SPREP; USP s Institute of Marine Resources & Faculty of Islands and Oceans; WWF Fiji through WWF Australia. 26. Report on the Review of the Fiji National Turtle Conservation Strategy, Suva, Fiji. Fiji Islands Bureau of Statistics Census of Population Url: Accessed 22 December 27. Fisk, E.K., 197. The Political Economy of Independent Fiji. Canberra: Australian National University Press.

122 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Gomez, ED., Reef management in developing countries: a case study in the Philipines. Coral Reefs 16: S3-S8 Haub, C., Kent, M.M., world population data sheet. Population Reference Bureau. Hill, R., Frankart, C., Ralph, PJ., 25. Impact of bleaching conditions on the components of non-photochemical quenching in the zooxanthellae of a coral. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 322: Harriott, V.J Mortality rates of sclerectinian coral before and during a mass bleaching event. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 21: Harvey, E., Fletcher, D., Shortis, M.R., Kendrick, G.A. 24 A comparison of underwater visual distances estimates made by scuba divers and a stereo-video system: implications for uinderwater visual census of reef fish abundance. Marine and Freshwater Research 55: Hemminga, M.A. and Duarte, C. 2. Seagrass Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hodgson, G. A Global Assessment of Human Effects on Coral Reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(5): Holmes, R.W The Secchi disk in turbid coastal waters. Limnol. Oceanogr 15: IUCN Red List Standards & Petitions Subcommittee Eretmochelys imbricata. In: IUCN IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Accessed 31 March 28 Knapman, B., Fiji s economic history, : studies of capitalist colonial development. Pacific Research Monograph No 15. Canberra: National Centre for Development Studies, Australian National University. Koop, K., Booth, D., Broadbent, A., Brodie, J., Bucher, D., Capone, D., Coll, J., Dennision, W., Erdman, M., Harrison, P., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Hutchings, P., Jones, GB., Larkum, A.W.D., O Neil, J., Steven, A., Tentori, E., Ward, S., Williamson, J., Yellowlees, D., 21. ENCORE: The Effect of Nutrient Enrichment on Coral Reefs. Synthesis of Results and Conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42: Kumar, C. 25. Revisiting community in community based natural resource management. Community Development Journal 4(3): Langton, M; Ma Rhea, Z; Palmer, L. 25. Community Oriented Protected Areas for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. Journal of Political Ecology 12: Frontier Fiji 16

123 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Laskar, H.R. Coffroth, M.A Responses to clonal reef taxa to environmental change. Amer. Zool. 39: Lonstaff, B.J., and Dennison, W.C Seagrass survival during pulsed turbidity events: the effects of light deprivation on the seagrasses Halodule pinifolia and Halophila ovalis. Aquatic Botany 65: Luna RW., 23. Traditional food prohibitions tapu on marine turtles among Pacific Islanders. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin.15: Marfo, E. 27 Institutionalizing citizen participation and community representation in natural resource management: Lessons from the Social Responsibility Agreement negotiation in Ghana. Community Development Journal. [Online] Available from: abstract/bsm28v1 [Accessed 21/2/28] McClanahan, T.R., Mangi, S. 2 Spillover of exploitable fishes from a marine park and its effect on the adjacent fishery. Ecological Applications. 1(6): McClanahan, T.R. Polunin, N., Done, T. 22 Ecological states and the resilience of coral reefs. Conservation Ecology 6(2) : 18 McLaughlin, C.J., Smith, CA., Buddemeier, RW., Bartley, JD., Maxwell, BA. 23. Rivers, runoff and reefs. Global and Planetary Change 39: McManus, J.W., Polsenberg, JF., 24. Coral-algal phase shifts on coral reefs: ecological and environmental aspects. Progress in Oceanography 6: McManus, J.W., Tropical marine fisheries and the future of coral reefs: a brief review with emphasis on Southeast Asia. Coral Reefs 16: S121-S127 Morelock, J., Boulon, K & Galler, G Sediment stress and coral reefs. Symp. Energy Industry and the Marine Environment in Guayanilla Bay, Ed J.M. Lopez, Muehlig Hoffmann, A. 27 Traditional authority and community leadership: Key factors in community based marine resource management and conservation. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin No. 21 [Online] Available from: ttp:// Murphree, M.W. 22 Protected Areas and the commons. Common Property Resource Digest 6: 1 3 Nair 23. Fiji Islands Marine Ecoregion. WWF-Fiji Programme. Pomeroy, R.S. and Williams, M.J Fisheries Co Management and Small Scale Fisheries:A Policy Brief. ICLARM, Manila Frontier Fiji 17

124 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 Pomeroy, R.S; Pollnac, R; Predo, C; Katon, B Impact evaluation of community based oastal resource management projects in the Philippines. Fisheries Co management Project Research Report No. 3 Manila: International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management. Pool, I., Wong, L.R., Vilquin, E. 26. Age-structural transitions: challenges for development. Committee for International Cooperation in National Research and Demography. Randall, J.E Grazing Effect on Sea Grasses by Herbivorous Reef Fishes in the West Indies. Ecology 46(3): Redford, K.H; Sanderson, S.E. 2 Extracting Humans from Nature. Conservation Biology 14(5): Rogers, C.S. 199 Responses of coral reefs and reef organisms to sedimentation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 62: Seminoff, J.A., 24. Chelonia mydas. In: IUCN IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. < Accessed on 31 March 28. Shannon, L.J., Cury, P.M. 23 Indicators quantifying small pelagic fish interactions: application using a trophic model of the southern Benguela ecosystem. Ecological Indicators 3: Souter, D.W., Linden, O., 2. The health and future of coral reef systems. Ocean & Coastal Management 43: South, G.R., Skelton, P.A., Veitayaki, J., Resture, A., Carpenter C., Pratt C., Lawedrau A. 24. The Global International Waters Assessment for the Pacific Islands: aspects of transboundary, water shortage, and coastal fisheries issues. Ambio 33(1-2): Thompson, L Southern Lau, Fiji: An ethnography. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 162. Honolulu Hawaii. Kraus Reprint Co. Toren, C Making Sense of Heirarchy, Cognition as a Social Process in Fiji. The Athlone Press, London Toren, C Mind, Materiality and History, Explorations in Fijian Ethnography. Routledge, London Uphoff, N Community Based Natural Resource Management: Connecting Micro and Macro Processes, and People with their Environments. Plenary Presentation, International CBNRM Workshop Washington D.C. USA May [Online] Available from: [Accessed 21/2/28] Veitayaki, J., Tawake, A., Bogiva, A., Meo, S., Nacanieli, R., Vave, R., Radikedike, P., Fong, S. 25. Partnerships and the quest for effective community-based resource Frontier Fiji 18

125 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 management: the Mositi Vanuaso project, Gau, Fiji. Jo. Pacific Studies 2(28): Veitayaki, J. 24. Building bridges: the contribution of traditional knowledge to ecosystem management and practices in Fiji. Paper presented at Bridging scales and epistemologies: linking local knowledge and global science in multi-scale assessments, Alexandria, Egypt, 17 2 March 24. Available online at Veitayaki, J. 26. Caring for the Environment and the Mitigation of Natural Extreme Events in Gau, Fiji Islands: A Self-help Community Initiative. Island Studies Journal, 1(2): Veitayaki, J Traditional marine resource management practices used in the Pacific Islands: an agenda for change. Ocean & Coastal Management 37(1): Veitayaki, J. 1997b Fisheries Resource Use Culture in Fiji and its Implications. In: ed. Hooper, A Culture and Sustainable Development in the Pacific [Online] Available from: [Accessed 21/2/28] Veitayaki, J Traditional and community based marine resources management system in Fiji: An evolving integrated process. Coastal Management 26: 47 6 Veitayaki, J. 2 Chapter 9: Fisheries resource use culture in Fiji and its implications, in Hooper, A. et al Culture and Sustainable Development in the Pacific. Asia Pacific Press, Canberra. Veitayaki, J; South, R.G. 21 Capacity building in the marine sector in the Pacific Islands: the role of the University of the South Pacific s Marine Studies Programme. Marine Policy 25(6): Veitayaki, J; Aalbersberg, B; Tawake, A; Rupeni, E; Tabunakawai, K. 23 Mainstreaming Resource Conservation: The Fiji locally Managed Marine Area Network and its Influence on National Policy Development. Resource Management in Asia Pacific Working Paper No. 42, Resource Management in Asia Pacific Program, The Australian National University, Canberra. Veitayaki, J; Tawake, A; Bogiva, A; Meo, S; Ravula, N; Vave, R; Radikedike, P; Fong, S.P. 27 Addressing Human Factors in Fisheries Development and Regulatory Processes in Fiji, the Mositi Vanuaso Experience. Ocean Yearbook 21: Weaver, S., A Strategy to Guide the Next Three Years of Research and Management of Sea Turtles in Fiji. Christchurch, New Zealand. Frontier Fiji 19

126 FFMRP - Gau Island, Fiji, Technical Report 2 West, J.M., Salm, R.V. 23 Resistance and Resilience to Coral Bleaching: Implications for Coral Reef Conservation and Management. Conservation Biology, 17(4): Yentsch, S., Yentsch, C.M., Cullen, J.J., Lapointe, B., Phinney, D.A., Yentsch, S.W., 22 Sunlight and water transparency cornerstones in coral research. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 268: Young, H.P The economics of convention. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1: Frontier Fiji 11