Pta Gruesa (EX67) April-June 2009 Report

Global Vision International,
2009 Report Series No. 002

ISSN 1748-9369 (Print)
GVI Mexico
Punta Gruesa Marine Conservation

Expedition, Q Roo, Mexico
Phase Report 092
April – June 2009

GVI Mexico/Marine Conservation Expedition Report 092
Submitted in whole to
Global Vision International
Amigos de Sian Ka’an
Produced by
Chris Mason-Parker – Field Staff

Stuart Fulton – Base Manager
Raphael Zara – Expedition Coordinator
Rowana Walton - Field Staff
Luli Noriega Pons – Field Staff
Nicola Taylor – Field Staff
And
Dean Tabone Scuba Instructor Liv Fordell Expedition Member

Tim Matthews Science Cath Branwood Expedition Member
Erika Gress Science Rebecca Emmett Expedition Member
Brian Runciman Expedition Member AC Geering Expedition Member
Carolyn Flesner Expedition Member Clemence Raemy Expedition Member
Victoria Preece Expedition Member Guy Passey Expedition Member
Francesca Hinman Expedition Member Joel Kemp Expedition Member
Jessica Dow Expedition Member Tim Hedley Expedition Member
Elliott Prior Expedition Member Reshma Barnarse Expedition Member
Robyn Pirie Expedition Member
Brandon Bell Expedition Member
Edited by
Daniel Ponce-taylor, Regional Director
GVI Mexico/Marine Conservation Expedition
Address: Apartado Postal 16, Col Centro, 77710

Playa del Carmen, Quintana Roo
Mexico
Email: mahahual@gviworld.com
Web page: http://www.gvi.co.uk and http://www.gviusa.com
Executive Summary
The sixth 10-week phase of the Punta Gruesa, Mexico, Global Vision International (GVI)
expedition has now been completed. The expedition has maintained working relationships
with local communities through both English classes and local community events. The
expedition has continued to work towards the gathering of important environmental
scientific data whilst working with local, national and international partners. The following
projects have been run during Phase 092:
• Monitoring of strategic sites along the coast.

• Training of EMs in the MBRS methodology including fish, hard coral, and algae
identification.
• Continuing the MBRS Synoptic Monitoring Programme (SMP) for the selected sites
within the Mahahual region to provide regional decision makers with up to date
information on the ecological condition of the reef.
• Providing English lessons and environmental education opportunities for the local
community.
• Further developing the current Marine Education programme for the children of
Mahahual that works alongside the standard curriculum.
• Liaise with local partners to develop a successful and feasible programme of research
in collaboration with GVI into the future.
• Continue adding to a coral and fish species list that will expand over time as a
comprehensive guide for the region.
• Continuation of the National Scholarship Programme, whereby GVI Punta Gruesa
accept a Mexican national on a scholarship basis into the expedition.
• Assisting with the local community to create and develop new environmental
management strategies, with GVI actively collaborating to develop Mahahual’s marine
zoning proposal.
© Global Vision International – 2009 ii

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ii
Table of Contents ...........................................................................................................iii
List of Figures................................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................. iv
1. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 5
2. Synoptic Monitoring Programme................................................................................. 7
2.1 Aim .................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1.Benthic Cover .......................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Fish Populations.................................................................................... 9
2.2.3 Physical Parameters ............................................................................ 13
2.3 Methodology and Training.............................................................................. 13
3. Results ...................................................................................................................... 18
3.1 Fish ................................................................................................................ 18
3.1.1 Adult fish............................................................................................... 18
3.1.2 Juvenile Fish .......................................................................................... 20
3.2 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 22
3.2.1 Adult Fish .............................................................................................. 22
3.2.2 Juvenile Fish ....................................................................................... 23
3.3 Coral............................................................................................................... 23
3.3.1 Point Intercept transects ...................................................................... 24
3.3.2 Coral Community Transects................................................................... 26
3.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 29
4. Incidental Sightings Programme............................................................................... 30
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 30
4.2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 30
4.3 Results............................................................................................................ 31
4.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 33
5. Coral Disease Monitoring Programme....................................................................... 35
5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 35
5.2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 35
5.3 Results & Discussion ...................................................................................... 36
6. Community Work Programme................................................................................... 38
6.1 English Language Programme ........................................................................ 39
6.2 Environmental Education................................................................................ 39
6.3 Other Programmes and Activities ................................................................... 39
6.3.1 Dive into Earth Day ............................................................................... 39
7. Marine Litter Monitoring Programme........................................................................ 41
7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 41
7.2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 41
7.3 Results............................................................................................................ 42
7.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 43
8. Bird Monitoring Programme ..................................................................................... 45
7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 45
8.2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 46
iii
8.3 Results............................................................................................................ 46
8.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................... 46
8.5 Limitations and error ...................................................................................... 47
9. References................................................................................................................. 49
10. Appendices.............................................................................................................. 51
Apendix A – SMP Methodology Outlines............................................................. 51
Appendix B. Species List of adult fish that are recorded during monitoring dives. 55
Appendix C - Juvenile Fish Indicator Species List ................................................ 56
Appendix D - Coral Species List........................................................................... 57
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Map of the monitoring (yellow) and training (green) sites for GVI Mahahual .... 14
Figure 3.1 Total fish biomass per phase........................................................................... 18
Figure 3.2 Adult fish familiy percentage abundance by phase .......................................... 19
Figure 3.3 Percentage abundance of adult fish families per site during 092. .................... 20
Figure 3.4 Percentage abundance of juvenile fish families by phase................................ 21
Figure 3.5 Percentage abundance of Surgeonfish and Turf Algae by phase .................... 22
Figure 3.6 Frequency of species by site on PI transects................................................... 24
Figure 3.7 Abundance of algaes recorded on PI transects ............................................... 25
Figure 3.8 Comparison of algae presence in 082 and 092 ............................................... 26
Figure 3.9 Presence of disease recorded during CC transects......................................... 27
Figure 3.10 Frequency of Bleaching recorded during CC transects.................................. 28
Figure 3.11 Frequency of predation recorded on CC transects ........................................ 28
Figure 4.1 Recorded sightings of sharks and rays from 084 to 092 .................................. 31
Figure 4.2 Turtle sightings by phase ................................................................................ 32
Figure 4.3 Sphyraena barracuda sightings by site............................................................ 33
Figure 5.1 Siderastrea siderea with areas of full bleaching............................................... 37
Figure 5.2 Diploria strigosa with red band disease. .......................................................... 38
Figure 6.1 Earth day activities ……………........................................................................ 40
Figure 6.2 Bubble maker………………............................................................................. 40
List of Tables
Table 2.0-1 Name, depth and GPS points of the first monitoring sites (SMP)................... 15
Table 3.1 Number of transects/adult fish recorded per phase. ......................................... 18
Table 3.0-2 Number of transects/juvenile fish recorded per phase ................................... 20
iv
1. Introduction
The Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System (MBRS) extends from Contoy island at the North
of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, to the Bay Islands of Honduras through Belize and
Guatemala and is the second largest barrier reef in the world.
The GVI Marine Programme within Mexico initiated the running of its first base, Pez Maya,
in the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve in 2003. Since then the programme has flourished,
with a sister site being set up in the south of the Yucatan at Mahahual. The current
projects of GVI Pez Maya and Mahahual are assisting Amigos de Sian Ka’an (ASK) and
Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas (CONANP) to obtain baseline data by
conducting marine surveys along the coast of Quintana Roo. By obtaining this data, ASK
and its partners can begin to focus on the areas needing immediate environmental
regulation depending on susceptibility; therefore, implementing management protection
plans as and when required. Surveys using the same methodology are being conducted
by a number of bodies through the entire Mesoamerican Barrier Reef, in Belize, Honduras
and Guatemala, coordinated by the MBRS project group.
Such a project is especially significant in current times of rapid development along the
small fishing village coast of the Mahahual area, due to the tourism industry generated by
the cruise ship pier that was built near the town in 2002.
The cruise ship pier was badly damaged following Hurricane Dean in August 2007 and
remained out of operation until October 2008 when Mahahual again began to receive the
first cruise ships. The current terminal can berth 3 cruise ships with, on average, 12
arrivals per week during high season. The cruise ships bring a flood of tourists in to the
Mahahual region, an area that, at present, only has a limited infrastructure for dealing with
large numbers of people. Furthermore, plans are underway to increase the number of
cruise ships in port, and on land, develop the roadway through the mangrove system,
increasing access to vacation homes and hotels. There are also plans to re-open the small
airport about 10 km from Mahahual in an effort to get more people to the area. Such
development invites degradation of other ecosystems contributing to the health of the reef,
as well as activities directly disturbing the reef, such as wave runners and environmentally
© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 5

unaware tourists, increasing the pressure on marine resources. Consequently, effective
monitoring is becoming ever more important. By assessing the health of the marine
environment, new policies can be formulated and environmental degradation prevented if
the appropriate measures are taken to advocate long-term, sustainable ecotourism.
The collaboration between ASK, UQROO and GVI in Mahahual was finalised in early
2004, contributing in part to the Programa de Manejo Integrado de Recursos Costeros
(MIRC),with the Estación Costa Maya (ECM) base running as a fully functional research
station from April 2004. Expeditions ran on a 10 week basis until June 2007, working on
marine and littoral studies and focusing on local community development. 5 weeks before
Hurricane Dean, GVI briefly moved to Sol y Mar, a site north of Mahahual town from where
the monitoring in Mahahual continued to be monitored. The last phase of 2007 was held in
the badly damaged ECM before arriving to Punta Gruesa in January 2008. Punta Gruesa
is located approximately 40km north of Mahahual and 12 km south of the southern tip of
the Sian Kaán Biosphere. The area is, at present, relatively unpopulated although many
plots of land in the locality are currently in the hands of foreign investors to eventually be
sold or in the process of development.
This expedition is the second of GVI’s second year at Punta Gruesa. By using divers with
appropriate training, GVI has demonstrated how Mexico can benefit from GVI’s work. The
data provided by large numbers of rigorously trained researchers will be extremely useful
for the decision makers for effective coastal zone management and provide a comparison
with data collected inside the Sian Kaán Biosphere at Pez Maya.

2. Synoptic Monitoring Programme
2.1 Aim
The projects at Punta Gruesa and Pez Maya aim to identify species and their resilience to
environmental stressors. The projects also aim to ascertain areas of high species diversity,
areas of high algal mass, fish species and abundance.
2.2 Introduction
2.2.1.Benthic Cover
Caribbean reefs were once dominated by hard coral, with huge Acropora palmata stands
on the reef crests and Acropora cervicornis and Montastraea annularis dominating the fore
reef. Today, many reefs in the Caribbean have been overrun by macroalgae during a
‘phase shift’ which is thought to have been brought about by numerous factors including a
decrease in herbivory from fishing and other pressures, eutrophication from land-based
activities and disease (McClanahan & Muthiga, 1998).
One of the Caribbean’s key reef herbivores, the long-spined sea urchin Diadema
antilarium, suffered mass mortalities during 1983-84, resulting in a reduction in number of
approximately 90% (Deloach, 1999). This has resulted in a large amount of grazing
pressure being removed, providing algae with an opportunity to increase in abundance.
Fishing pressures, and the subsequent removal of herbivorous fish such as Parrotfish, has
further reduced grazers.
The main coral family in the Caribbean was once the Acroporidae which includes the
Acropora cervicornis and palmata. In the mid 1980’s this family suffered from what
developed into a massive reduction in abundance, which can be clearly seen on many
sites in the area by the rubble of dead skeletons of the above species. This decline has
subsequently been attributed to both White Band disease and natural factors, and has
lead to A. palmata and A. cervicornis being added to the US Endangered Species list as
‘threatened’ (NOAA, 2006). The removal of the Acroporids lead to a change in dominance
to the lesser reef building families Poritidae and Agaricidae and it had been found that
sites across the Caribbean have decreased in hard coral coverage by as much as 80%

over the last 30 years (Gardener et al., 2003). With the reduction in Acropora sp., the
decimation of the Diadema population and continued fishing pressures, algal species have
been able to flourish, and combined with increasing eutrophication, the shift to algal
dominance has taken root.
Benthic transects record the abundance of all benthic species as well as looking at coral
health. The presence of coral on the reef is in itself an indicator of health, not only because
of the reefs current state, but also for its importance to fish populations (Spalding & Jarvis,
2002). Coral health is not only impacted by increased nutrients and algal growth, but by
other factors, both naturally occurring and anthropogenically introduced. A report produced
by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre
(UNEP-WCMC) in 2004 stated that nearly 66% of Caribbean reefs are at risk from
anthropogenic activities, with over 40% of reefs at high to very high risk (UNEP-WCMC,
2006).
Naturally occurring events such as hurricanes can have devastating effects on coral reefs
in very short periods of time (Gardener et al., 2005). The impact of a hurricane can be felt
for some time after the initial strike due to increased sedimentation and nutrient load as
low turbidity and low nutrient levels are required for coral growth and health. An increase
in sedimentation has been found to increase mortality rates due to impeded
photosynthesis and increased energy required to remove sediment from colony surfaces
(Nuges & Roberts, 2003; Yentsch et al., 2002). Sediment levels can increase after storms
and hurricanes and also as a result of anthropogenic activities such as deforestation,
dredging and coastal construction. Hurricanes can also damage reefs through increased
wave action, which physically destroys more fragile species resulting in a phase shift of
dominant corals.
Different coral families have differing resistances to stress. However, with multiple
stressors present (sediment, removal of herbivores, disease) even the most hardy can
succumb to the pressure, resulting in loss of coral coverage (Kenyon et al., 2006; Yentsch
et al., 2002). The measurement of percentage coral mortality provides a way of
determining the state of health for the colony and these measures are taken during benthic
monitoring (Nuges & Roberts, 2003).

As a result of the phase shift on Caribbean reefs, the abundance and type of algae present
are of particular interest. It has been found that some macroalgae and cyanobacteria do
not simply occupy space on the reef, but can actively inhibit coral recruitment (Kuffner et
al., 2006). Of those algae present on the reef, two key genera are particularly observed,
Halimeda and Dictyota. Halimeda is an important genera due to its calcified structure
providing large amounts of calcium carbonate that contributes greatly to beaches and adds
to the structure of the reef (Littler et al., 1989). Dictyota spp. have been found to not only
inhibit the growth of Halimeda spp. through its epiphytic nature, but also certain species
have been found to be able to kill coral recruits in ways other than by simply shading the
light or taking the available space (Beach et al., 2003; Kuffner et al., 2006). Due to their
opportunistic nature, ability to deal with stress and mechanisms for out-competing coral for
space, algae has been able to maintain the coral-algae phase shift.
It is not confirmed what the major culprit for these phase shifts is, but it is believed that the
reversal of one or more causative factor could lead to a shift back to coral dominance
(Edmunds & Carpenter, 2001). In the Caribbean the decrease in coral coverage is
believed to be slowing (Gardener et al., 2003). Studies in Jamaica have found areas of
Diadema resurgence and within these areas, macroalgae coverage has been found to
have reduced and the number of young corals has increased (Edmunds & Carpenter,
2001).
Through monitoring the abundances of hard corals, algae and various other key benthic
species, as well as numbers of Diadema urchin encountered, we aim to determine not only
the current health of the local reefs but also to track any shifts in phase state over time.
2.2.2 Fish Populations
Large numbers of fish can be found on and around coral reefs. These fish are associated
with the reef for a variety of reasons. The structural complexity of coral reefs provides
shelter for fish, a quick refuge from predators during the day or a safe place to sleep at
night. Others rely on the reef directly for food, be they corallivores, such as Butterflyfish,
Chaetodontidae or territorial herbivores like some Damselfish, Pomacentridae. The reef

also indirectly provides food for predatory fish, both those that are site attached like
Scorpion fish and pelagic predators such as Bar Jacks.
Fish surveys are focused on specific species (see Appendix B) that play an important role
in the ecology of the reef as herbivores, carnivores, commercially important fish or those
likely to be affected by human activities (AGRRA, 2000).
The most important herbivorous fish on the reef are the Parrotfish, Scaridae, and the
Surgeonfish, Acanthuridae (AGRRA, 2000).
Parrotfish feed primarily on uncalcified algae and seagrasses. However, they are more
widely known for scraping algal turf from dead coral heads with their fused front teeth,
which form a beak like structure. Live coral is rarely eaten by parrotfish, with the exception
of the Stoplight Parrotfish, Sparisoma viridae, and the Queen Parrotfish, Scarus vetula,
which often feed on living Montastrea annularis colonies. Parrotfish also utilise the caves,
overhangs and crevices in the reef for protection at night from predators (Deloach, 1999).
Surgeonfish often feed in large mixed aggregations on the reef, descending upon
damselfish gardens and decimating them before moving on. Feeding continues all day,
with Blue Tangs and Doctorfish concentrating their activities on the reef itself, while the
Ocean Surgeonfish tend to forage over the sand. All surgeonfish play an important role in
limiting the growth of algae on the reef (Deloach, 1999).
The importance of other fish can be determined by commercial fishing pressure. Many
carnivores on the reef such as Groupers and Snappers are important predators and their
presence denotes a balanced food chain and also low levels of fishing. Snappers feed
nocturnally on crustaceans and small fish and inhabit the reef in daylight hours. Groupers
occaisonaly feed during the day, but mainly at dusk and dawn, drawing their prey of fish,
crustaceans and cephalopods into their mouths by simply opening them wide, creating a
suction effect (Deloach, 1999).
Unlike the groupers and snappers, Bar Jacks and Barracuda are pelagic predators and are
considered top-level carnivores feeding mainly on fish. They are also commercially

important fish and their removal has knock on effects to the balance of the food chain
(Deloach, 1999).
Other predatory fish recorded during fish surveys and which are susceptible to fishing
pressures are the many Grunt species, often the most abundant fish on many Caribbean
reefs, which spend their days around the reef and feeding at night on sea grass beds, and
Hogfish, a favourite target for spear fishers, Spanish Hogfish and Triggerfish (Lee &
Dooley, 1998; Deloach, 1999).
Fish such as Butterflyfish and Angelfish are also commercially important, but for removal
for the aquarium trade rather than for commercial fishing. Butterflyfish are coralivores,
eating polyps from both hard corals and gorgonians and are considered to be a general
indicator of good coral health. Angelfish, once thought to belong to the same family as the
Butterflyfish, can also be coralivores, but have evolved over time to feed on sponges,
possibly to avoid increased competition for food (AGRRA, 2000 & Deloach, 1999).
All reef fish play an important role in maintaining the health and balance of a reef
community. Fishing typically removes larger predatory fish from the reef, which not only
alters the size structure of the reef fish communities, but with the reduction in predation
pressure, the abundance of fish further down the food chain is now determined through
competition for resources (AGRRA, 2000).
Although each fish is important, the removal of herbivores can have a considerable impact
on the health of the reef, particularly in an algal dominated state, which without their
presence has little chance of returning to coral dominance. Through the monitoring of
these fish and by estimating their size, the current condition of the reef at each site can be
assessed, any trends or changes can be tracked and improvements or deteriorations
determined.
Population abundances are determined to an extent by larval recruitment. The vast

majority of reef fish are pelagic spawners, releasing their gametes into the water column
where they are under the influence of water flow for several weeks. Other forms of
spawning include benthic egglaying, which is common among Damselfish and Triggerfish.

Despite the fertilised eggs being laid in nests and protected by diligent parents, once
hatched, even these larvae have a pelagic period where their distribution is also controlled
by water movement. During this time the fish larvae can travel hundreds of miles from
where they were originally spawned, occasionally, however, due to specific oceanographic
influences, larvae may be held close to their site of origin (Deloach, 1999).
For larvae which survive their pelagic existence, when they eventually settle, they may be
a considerable distance from where they were spawned. Recruitment of these larvae into
the populations of the different sites has been found to vary. There are several theories
about the difference in recruitment levels between sites, even those which are closely
situated. Some believe that each reef has a specific carrying capacity and recruitment is
based on existing adult abundances. Others believe that abundance of larval recruits is
determined after they have settled on a site when competition for resources such as food,
space and shelter begin. Rates of predation at specific sites will also play their part in the
survival of larval recruits. Recruitment has also been found to vary seasonally (Deloach,
1999).
The monitoring of juvenile fish concentrates on a few specific species. The presence and
number of larvae at different sites can be used as an indication of potential future
population size and diversity. Due to the extensive distribution of larvae, however,
numbers cannot be used to determine the spawning potential of a specific reef. The
removal of fish from a population as a result of fishing, however, may influence spawning
potential and affect larval recruitment on far away reefs. The removal of juvenile predators
through fishing may also alter the number of recruits surviving to spawn themselves
(AGRRA, 2000).
Together with the information collected about adult fish a balanced picture of the reef fish
communities at different sites can be obtained.

2.2.3 Physical Parameters
For the optimum health and growth of coral communities certain factors need to remain
relatively stable. Measurements of turbidity, water temperature, salinity, cloud cover, and
sea state are taken during survey dives. Temperature increases or decreases can
negatively influence coral health and survival. As different species have different optimum
temperature ranges, changes can also influence species richness. Corals also require
clear waters to allow for optimum photosynthesis. The turbidity of the water can be
influenced by weather, storms or high winds stirring up the sediment, or anthropogenic
activities such as deforestation and coastal construction. Increased turbidity reduces light
levels and can result in stress to the coral. Any increase in coral stress levels can result in
them becoming susceptible to disease or result in a bleaching event.
In the near future, GVI Punta Gruesa hopes to be able to use this data for analysis of
temporal and seasonal changes and try to correlate any coral health issues with sudden or
prolonged irregularities within these physical parameters.
2.3 Methodology and Training
The Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System Synoptic Monitoring Programme methodology

has been followed in the monitoring of this phase’s sites. At each site transects were
undertaken at a depth of 10m, which corresponds with the reef crest at each site.
The sites that are monitored as part of the MBRS programme at GVI Mahahual were
chosen through discussions with ASK, the Programa de Manejo Integrado de Recursos
Costeros (MIRC, a subsidiary of UQROO) and discussions with local fishermen.
The established sites currently cover the immediate vicinity to Punta Gruesa but more
sites are looking to be added to the monitoring programme. Seven of these are currently
monitored annually with a range covering 6.5 km of the coast.

Figure 2.1 Map of the monitoring (yellow) and training (green) sites for GVI Mahahual

Table 2.1 lists the locations of the monitoring sites. GPS points are listed here in the
WGS84 datum.
Location Site ID Depth Latitude Longitude

Los Boyos LB10 10m 19.02 21.8 087.33 54.8
Las Joyas LJ10 10m 19.01 53.0 087.34 07.6
Los Milagros LM10 10m 19.01 35.6 087.34 13.3
Costa Norte CN10 10m 19.01 31.0 087.34 16.5
Las Delicias LD10 10m 19.01 24.7 087.34 20.2
Las Palapas LP10 10m 19.01 55.8 087.34 05.0
Flor De Cañon FDC10 10m 19.02 04.4 087.34 03.4
Sol Naciente SN10 10m 19.00 36.0 087.34 33.0
Delicias Profundas DP30 30m 19.91 24.7 087.34 20.2
Los Gorditos LG25 25m 18.59 37.6 087.34 51.9
Table 2.1 Name, depth and GPS points of the first monitoring sites (SMP).
The methods employed for the underwater visual census work are those outlined in the
MBRS manual (Almada-Villela et al., 2003), but to summarise, GVI use three separate
methods for buddy pairs:
o Buddy method 1: Surveys of corals, algae and other sessile organisms

o Buddy method 2: Belt transect counts for coral reef fish
o Buddy Method 3: Coral Rover and Fish Rover diver
The separate buddy pair systems are outlined in detail in Appendix A.
2.4 Synoptic Monitoring ProgrammeTraining
The non-specialist volunteers recruited by GVI all undergo a rigorous training programme
prior to taking part in monitoring surveys. There are four expeditions a year, each identified
by a three digit code incorporating the year and phase period, i.e. the first phase of 2009
then becomes 091, the second 092 and so on. During each phase, EMs are trained in 5
week periods. During the first 3 weeks, a series of theory and practical sessions are held
to develop each EMs knowledge and skills to a standard level, which is necessary to

obtain reliable data. Each EM focuses on the knowledge and skills required to conduct
either fish or coral MBRS SMP transects.
The lecture series builds on basic concepts of coral reef ecology and introduces issues
that are relevant to marine research monitoring.
Hazards of the Reef Classification and Taxonomy

Goals of the Station Monitoring Methods and Lecture Demonstration
Introduction to Coral Reefs Marine Plants and Algae
Introduction to Fish and Coral Coral Diseases
Introduction to Coral Identification Marine Turtles
Introduction to Fish Identification Development of the Quintana Roo Coast
Threats to the Reef General Oceanography
In addition to these lectures, volunteers take part in a number of coral or fish identification
workshops with staff members, before taking a computer exam that requires a minimum
95% score to pass.
Underwater training focuses first on developing the necessary dive skills, with an
emphasis on high levels of buoyancy control and diving safety procedures. EMs then
undergo a series of spots, covering either hard coral and benthic species identification, as
well as coral health monitoring techniques, or adult and juvenile fish identification, size
estimation exercises and practice transect work. EMs are tested by experienced
monitoring staff at each stage, with 100% required before being approved for monitoring.
Physical Parameters
In addition to the dive survey reports collected at each site, measurements of the following
physical parameters are collected on each dive survey made at the permanent SMP
monitoring sites:

Sea state Salinity
Cloud Cover Bottom and surface temperature
Turbidity
Sea state is recorded using a modification of the Beaufort scale for wind.
Cloud density is recorded through a visual estimation of the cover above the site by
dividing the sky into eight and establishing how many sections have 60% or greater
coverage.
Turbidity is recorded using a Secchi disk marked in half metre intervals, which is lowered
into the water until no longer visible. The length of line is then established whilst the disk
is reeled in.
Salinity samples are taken at the surface of the survey site by the captain from the boat
and on the reef itself by one of the survey divers. The samples are tested using a
refractometer to obtain direct salinity measurements in parts per thousand (PPT).
Surface temperature is recorded using a handheld depth sounder with built in temperature
gauge. Bottom temperature is collected from a survey diver using a dive computer.

3. Results
3.1 Fish
The numbers of transects per phase and total fish seen per transect are listed in Table 3.1.
In 092 there was a significant increase in the number of fish recorded per transect
compared with 091.
Total
Transects in
Phase Phase Total fish in phase Fish per transect
081 30 391 13.03
082 54 649 12.02
083 49 280 5.79
084 40 321 8.03
091 39 334 8.56
092 48 843 17.56
Table 3.1 Number of transects/adult fish recorded per phase.
3.1.1 Adult fish
Figure 3.1 Total fish biomass per phase
Adult fish biomass witnessed a dramatic increase in 092 compared with the previous three
phases. At 3.86kg 100m-2 this is an increase of 1.8kg and the highest level recorded since

082. The increase though extremely encouraging still remains well below the Caribbean
average.
Species belonging to 13 families were recorded during transect monitoring in phase 092.
Figure 3.2 displays adult fish percentage abundance for twelve families as once again no
sightings of the family Sphyraenidae were recorded. Following the trend of previous
phases Haemulidae accounted for the most commonly observed fish family with 50.9% of
the total number observed. The next most abundant family was the Acanthuridae
(22.30%), Scaridae (6.64%) and Lutjanidae (5.69%). All remaining families accounted for
less than 15% of the total sightings.
% Abundance of adult
fish
Phase
Figure 3.2 Adult fish familiy percentage abundance by phase

Site
Figure 3.3 Percentage abundance of adult fish families per site during 092.
Figure 3.3 shows the percentage abundance of fish families for each of the survey sites
monitored. The two dominant fish families recorded were the grunts (Haemulidae) and the
Surgeonfish (Acanthuridae). As with phase 091, the grunts were the more abundant family
observed at all sites except ‘Flor de Canyon’ (FDC10). Transects undertaken at CN10 and
LP10 recorded higher numbers of Snapper than at other sites, while Parrotfish were most
frequently observed at FDC10 and LB10.
3.1.2 Juvenile Fish

Total
Transects in
Phase Phase Total fish in phase Fish per transect
081 30 302 10.06
082 54 809 14.98
083 49 605 12.35
084 40 308 7.70
091 39 224 5.74
092 48 862 17.96
Table 3.2 Number of transects/juvenile fish recorded per phase

% Abundance
Phase
Figure 3.4 Percentage abundance of juvenile fish families by phase
As with previous phases total of five juvenile fish families were monitored on transects in
092. The most abundant family recorded at all sites was Labridae (52%). The results show
abundance of Pomacentridae (32%) and Scaridae (12%) have increased in 092 when
compared with the previous phase. 092 also witnessed the highest number of
Acanthuridae recorded since monitoring began.

% Abundance
Phase
Figure 3.5 Percentage abundance of Surgeonfish and Turf Algae by phase
Figure 3.5 shows the relationship between Acanthuridae and Turf Algae. As with the same
period last year there has been a slight decrease in the abundance of both Surgeonfish
and Turf Algae for the phase 092.
3.2 Discussion
3.2.1 Adult Fish

A total of 843 adult fish were recorded in phase 092, the highest number since monitoring
began at Punta Gruesa. During this period the families Acanthuridae and Haemulidae
have dominated the adult fish data. Once again in 092 these familes made up a large
proportion of the total fish observed, with the Haemulidae accounting for over 50% of the
total fish species. At present the reasons for the dramatic increase in adult fish biomass
when compared to the previous three phases is unclear. However, it is likely that the
recording of a number of schools of the species Haemulon carbonarium and Haemulon
sciurus containing over twenty individuals at the sites CN10 and LM10 may have
contributed partly to the increased fish numbers. Due to the design of the methodology
used, fish species are only recorded if they pass through an estimated 2m box in front of

the monitoring diver, remaining unrecorded if they linger outside this area. Another
possibility for the increased biomass is a higher accuracy in fish sizing by volunteers.
The number of adult fish recorded for the remaining families remained relatively constant
with that of previous phases. Furthermore, the continued close correlation between the
abundance of Acanthuridae and Turf algae indicates a balanced equilibrium within the reef
ecosystem.
There have been no reports of members of the family Sphyraenidae for the past five
phases. These results are misleading and can once again be attributed to the monitoring
methodology employed. Sphyraena barracuda (Great Barracuda) spend much of their time
high in the water column and rarely cruise close to the reef benthos. For this reason they
ae unlikely to swim into the divers´ 2m box and remain unrecorded. Due to this
inconsistency, GVI Punta Gruesa has included Great Barracuda as part of the Incidental
Sightings program (Section 4) and will look to monitor population numbers in the area.
3.2.2 Juvenile Fish

Juvenile fish numbers peak as coastal waters warm during the first six months of the year.
In 092 an average of 17.96 juvenile fish were recorded per transect compared with 5.74 in
the previous phase. Adult T.bifasciatum and H.garnoti usually spawn in the spring or early
summer with juveniles of the species recruiting to the dermal population in summer. With
this in mind the increase in juvenile numbers was expected. However, coinciding with the
adult fish recorded, the scale of the increase in phase 092 when compared with the
previous two phases can not be attributed to this alone. Currently the reasons for this
significant increase are unknown and will require further investigation.
3.3 Coral
The coral health and biodiversity of benthic species is an important indicator for reef
health. The PI (Point Intercept) and CC (Coral Communities) transects offer data to assess
these indicators over the monitoring period.

3.3.1 Point Intercept transects
The PI transect gives an overview of the benthic cover of the monitoring sites. Below is the
breakdown of these results for 092 by site.
Frequency of species by site on PI transects
250 Hermatypic Coral

Bryozoan
200 Blue Green Algae

Coralline Algae
Dictyota
Frequency
150
Gorgonians
Halimeda
100 Lobophora
Macroalgae
Sand
50
Sponge
Turf algae
0 Zoanthid
CN FDC LB LJ LM LP Tunicate
Site
Figure 3.6 Frequency of species by site on PI transects
The overall most common species according to the figure is Macroalgae. The algae, in
general, are abundant, which is in line with the phase shift that has occurred throughout
the Caribbean whereby coral cover has reduced, and alga has become dominant. The
changes are thought to be related to anthropogenic influences such as fishing pressures,
coastal development and climate changes that have changed the environment and
therefore affected the balance of species thriving there.
Hermatypic corals are relatively consistent over the sites, and appear to be equal
coverage to some algae species.

The algae are separated below, illustrating the dominance of macroalage in comparison to
the other species. Blue-green algae appear to be the least common amongst the group,
with the larger, more aggressive growth types taking over the space.
Abundence of algaes recorded on PI

transects
250
200 Turf algae

Frequency
150 Macroalgae
Dictyota
100
Halimeda
50 Lobophora
0 Coralline Algae
CN FDC LB LJ LM LP Blue Green Algae
Site
Figure 3.7 Abundance of algaes recorded on PI transects
A comparison between this phases algae data, and that recorded in 2008 are shown
below. The patterns and trends appear to remain fairly constant, and macro emerges as
the most dominant algal category during both phases.

Comparison of algae presence in 082 and 092
1400
1200
1000
Frequency
800 082
600 092
400
200
0
n
a
ta
ro
rf
e
ee
or
ed
llin
Tu
yo
ac
ph
lim
gr
ra
ict
M
bo
Co
Ha
ue
Lo
Bl
Algae
Figure 3.8 Comparison of algae presence in 082 and 092
3.3.2 Coral Community Transects

The CC transects offer a view of the health of the corals themselves by recording disease,
predation and bleaching presence on the reef. By far the most common disease on all
phases is Dark Spot Disease, which is illustrated by the results of the figure below. It was
the only disease recorded during 092, with the exception of a few cases of unknown
diseases that were found along transects. This can be taken as a good sign, with the
presence of only one disease rather than abundance of the more aggressive diseases
such as White Band and Yellow Blotch that kill large sections or all of a colony, compared
to Dark Spot that is far less aggressive.

Pre s e nce of dis e as e re corde d on CC
trans e cts
40
35
30
Frequency
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dark spot Other
Dis e as e
Figure 3.9 Presence of disease recorded during CC transects
Bleaching follows a similar pattern to other phases, with the three types in proportion in
comparison. Pale bleaching is an overall lightening of the colony, full is the complete loss
of zooxanthellae over a significant proportion of the coral, and partial being small area of
full bleaching. Pale is the most common due to the prevelance on a certain species that is
very abundant in the area; Sidersatrea siderea. This species often presents with pale
bleaching, and therefore due to the abundance, pale is often high in proportion to the other
types.

Frequency of bleaching recorded on CC
transects
Frequency
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Full Pale Partial
Bleach type
Figure 3.10 Frequency of Bleaching recorded during CC transects
Finally, the CC transects monitor predation on corals such as overgrowth and other reef
creatures that eat the polyps. The figure below shows the breakdown of this for 092.
Sponge overgrowth, namely Cliona, is the most common source of predation, with the
remainder presenting only once or twice. The numbers are relatively low, which, for the
volume of corals recorded overall, is positive for the health of the reef.
Frequency of predation recorded on CC

transects
12
10
Frequency
8
6
4
2
0
Damselfish Firew orm Gorgonian Short coral Sponge Tunicate
snail overgrow th overgrow th
Predation type
Figure 3.11 Frequency of predation recorded on CC transects

3.4 Discussion
The data in general is showing little in the way of degredation or recovery. The reef
appears to be fairly stable overall, with the algae trend and coral cover remaining constant.
The presence of diseases and predation is in line with previous phases, showing little or
no increase that would suggest the health and resislience of corals to be changing.
With further study, more trends will become aparent and with the socioeconomic
information surrounding the area and knowledge of development and activities pertaining
to the reef, strategies can be suggested for management of the area to ensure the reef is
sustained or allowed to recover from previous factors.

4. Incidental Sightings Programme
4.1 Introduction
GVI Mahahual has implemented an incidental sightings program since April 2004, due to
the high number of turtles and other megafauna species seen on dives in the area.
Species that make up the incidental sightings list are:
• Sharks and Rays
• Eels
• Turtles
• Marine Mammals
• Great Barracuda
These groups are identified to species level where possible and added to the data
collected by the Ocean Biogeographic Information Systems Spatial Ecological Analysis of
Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS-SEAMAP) database. An interactive online archive for
marine mammal, seabird and turtle data, OBIS-SEAMAP aims to improve understanding
of the distribution and ecology of marine megafauna by quantifying global patterns of
biodiversity, undertaking comparative studies, and monitoring the status of and impacts on
threatened species.
4.2 Methodology
Each time an incidental sighting species is seen on a dive or snorkel it is identified, and the
date, time, location, depth it was seen at, and size are all recorded. The EM’s are provided
with a Megafauna presentation during science training, which aids in identification of
shark, ray and turtle species. All the completed dives are logged by GVI, showing the total
effort for each phase in comparison with the species recorded.
Previous Mahahual expeditions have recorded turtle nesting sites during the nesting
season. However in Punta Gruesa there are no nesting beaches so this programme has
been discontinued.
For the first time in 092 GVI Punta Gruesa began recording Sphyraena barracuda
sightings.

4.3 Results
A total of 170 incidental sightings (excluding S.barracuda) were recorded during 092.
Sharks rays and eels were once again the most commonly observed species (130
individuals).
Rays are the most commonly observed members of the Sharks, rays and eels category
across the past three phases, with the Southern Stingray the most common of the rays
(Figure 4.1) 092 provided the highest number of Southern stingray, Spotted Eagle ray and
Yellow stingray observations.
Number of individuals recorded
Phase
Figure 4.1 Recorded sightings of sharks and rays from 084 to 092

Six sharks were observed this phase. This is an increase on the previous two phases with
the most common species remaining the nurse shark. Two Caribbean reef sharks were
also recorded.
Number of individuals recorded
Figure 4.2 Turtle sightings by phase
A total of twenty-six turtles were recorded in 092 which is nine more than the previous
phase. A significant increase in observations of Hawksbill and Loggerhead turtles over the
previous two phases contrasted with an absence in Green turtle recordings for 092 (Figure
4.2).
For the first time in 092 Sphyraena barracuda (Great Barracuda) sightings were recorded.
A total of 158 individuals were observed across all the sites (Figure 4.3) with the highest
number observed (44 individuals) at the site ‘Las Palapas’.

Figure 4.3 Sphyraena barracuda sightings by site
4.4 Discussion
Incidental sightings of large marine creatures are often good indicators of a healthy
ecosystem. These species are highly mobile animals and therefore their movements
depend on a range of external factors.
At present with a limited amount of data available few obvious trends are visible. It is
expected that the collection of additional data over future phases will allow for further
investigation of temporal trends.
The reasons for a lack of Green turtle sightings in 092 are unclear and require further
investigation. Unlike Green turtles, recordings of Hawksbill and Loggerhead turtles have
increased significantly over the past two phases. This may perhaps be attributed to the
discovery of the new dive site ‘Los Gorditos’ (LG) which was dived over twenty times last
phase. A spur and groove site with a bottom depth of around 28m, and many crevices and

overhangs favoured by Hawksbill turtles, LG provided six of the total of eleven Hawksbill
sightings.
A significant increase in the number of eel and ray sightings can perhaps be attributed to
more accurate recording of megafauna sightings. The appointment of a monitor ensured
data was collected after each dive and snorkel. Despite this, sightings of Aetobatus
narinari (the spotted eagle ray is a species that has traditionally been recorded accurately
over previous phases) have increased dramatically. A total of eighteen were identified in
092 compared with eleven in 091 and four in 084. Furthermore, in 091 all eleven Spotted
Eagle Ray sightings took place in the Lagoon while in 092 ten of the eighteen observations
took place on different dive sites. The reason for the increase in Aetobatus narinari
sightings over the last three phases is unclear but may bare some relation to the breeding
season of Strombus gigas (Queen conch), one of the rays preferred food items.
The sites dived around Punta Gruesa appear to support a healthy Sphyraena barracuda
population. An important apex predator alongside sharks, S.barracuda populations help to
maintain a healthy equilibrium within coral reef ecosystems. The reefs in the area are
subjected to low level fishing pressure from a group of six to ten spear fishermen. The
fishermen fish the reef on average once a week targeting Great barracuda alongside other
fish species. In addition to spearfishing, the coastline also plays host to sporadic game
fishing tournaments during which S. barracuda are one of the species caught.
Sphyraena barracuda is a circumtropical, diurnal species, hunting along coral reefs and
seagrass beds from just after sunrise until before sunset.
The site ‘Las Palapas’ accounted for the highest number of sightings with an average of
4.89 barracuda observed on each visit to the site. On six occasions during 092 S.
barracuda was observed schooling in groups of between eight and twenty individuals. This
schooling behaviour is frequently seen in subadults and is thought to be a behavioural
adaptation aimed and prey capture and predator avoidance. However, the schooling
barracuda observed over the phase 092 were predominantly large adults ranging from 1.3-
1.7m in size. Further monitoring over the coming phases will determine whether this
behaviour is common in the local area.

5. Coral Disease Monitoring Programme
5.1 Introduction
In phase 092 GVI Punta Gruesa implemented a coral disease, predation and bleaching
monitoring program. Globally coral reefs are under severe pressure from a series of
natural and anthropogenic impacts including overfishing, disease, pollution, sedimentation,
climate change and unsound tourism practices. The prevalence of disease may be higher
in corals stressed by human impacts such as mechanical damage and pollution (Bryant et
al., 1998). As sea temperatures continue to rise and the seas become more polluted the
occurrence of disease is likely to become more frequent. Through an integrated coral
disease, predation and bleaching monitoring program, GVI Punta Gruesa hopes to
observe how different species of coral are affected by stressors and investigate whether
recovery, if it occurs, is driven by the coral species or physical parameters.
5.2 Methodology
Individual coral colonies affected by disease or bleaching were identified, tagged and
photographed at the site ‘Los Milagros’ (LM). Polystyrene markers attached to 1m lengths
of string provided a visual tag. The coral colony is photographed and physical parameters
recorded. A coral cover pole was used to provide scale and measure the extent of
disease/predation/bleaching. The colonies were then revisited at five-week intervals and
further photographs taken to monitor the stressors.
Four colonies were tagged on May 20st 2009 and photographs taken for further analysis.
LM1 = Diploria strigosa with encrusting gorgonian
LM2 = Siderastrea siderea affected by white plague.
LM3 = Siderastrea siderea with partial bleaching.
LM4 = Diploria strigosa affected by red band disease.

The site was revisited on July 3rd 2009 and additional photographs taken for comparative
analysis.
5.3 Results & Discussion
Encrusting Gorgonian (LM1)

The encrusting gorgonian Erythropodium caribaeorum is known to overgrow and kill
hermatypic corals. A colony of Diploria strigosa was identified at the site ´Los Milagros´ at
a depth of 10m with approximately 60% of the coral covered by a layer of E.caribaeorum.
The coral colony was revisited after a five week period and further photographs and
measurements taken. Initial observations point towards little if any change in the
percentage of the colony encrusted.
White Plague (LM2)

The identified colony of Siderastrea siderea has a diameter of 18cm and a height of 10cm.
It is located at a depth of 12m. When observed on May 20st 2009 it exhibited a thin circular
band of white plague approximately 8cm in diameter on the top of the colony. Upon
returning to the coral on June 3rd 2009 further observations indicate that there had been
minimal if any progress regarding the spread of the disease. The water temperature on
both occasions was 28 degrees centigrade.
Partial Bleaching (LM3)

Once again a colony of Siderastre siderea was selected on this occasion displaying partial
bleaching. The colony located at a depth of 11m is 22cm in diameter with a height of 2cm.
Accross one side it is in competition with another S. siderea.

Figure 5.1 Siderastrea siderea with areas of full bleaching.
20/05/2009 03/07/2009
2 2
Figure 5.1 displays partial bleaching on a colony of Siderastrea siderea over a period of
approximately five weeks. The photograph taken on July 3rd clearly shows a return of the
zooxanthellae to many areas of the colony, particularly in the centre and the bottom left
corner. However, further bleaching appears to have occurred in the area towards the right
of the colony (as seen in the photographs). The reason for an increased bleaching in this
area is likely to be the stress related resulting from the competing S.siderea.
Red Band Disease (LM4)

Diploria strigosa is a species of brain coral that is commonly affected by red band disease
(RBD). In the colony identified as part of the monitoring program, RBD was already well
established. Located at a depth of 10.5m, the colony has a diameter of 100cm and a
height of 80cm. Upon first observation of the approximately 70% of the colony was dead
with the disease working its way from the top of the coral towards the bottom. The colony
was visited again after three weeks at which point only 10-15% remained healthy and
again after five weeks by which time the entire coral was dead (Figure 5.2). The
observations show that red band disease moves quickly destroying 30% of a large coral
colony in less than six weeks. In future GVI Punta Gruesa will look to identify a colony
exhibiting early signs of the disease to obtain an improved idea of the timescale between
disease appearance and coral mortality.

Figure 5.2 Diploria strigosa with red band disease.
20/05/09 11/06/09 03/07/09
Over the coming phases the programme will continue to monitor the marked colonies LM2
& LM3 while looking to tag and monitor further corals exhibiting signs of stress. Through
the ongoing identification and monitoring of coral disease and predation and the early
detection of coral bleaching GVI Punta Gruesa hopes to build up a better understanding of
the factors affecting differing coral colonies.
6. Community Work Programme
GVI is committed to working with the local communities, assisting them to guide
Mahahual´s development towards a sustainable future. For that, we center our activities in
two main aspects: English and Environmental Education.
GVI hopes to provide locals in Mahahual with the tools to develop the area beneficially for
themselves, their professions and needs, whilst protecting it for the future. Consequently,
during both the child and adult education programs, wherever possible an environmental
theme has been included within the structure of the lessons.
EMs appreciate the opportunity to participate in the teaching experience and are happy to
interact with and contribute directly to the community and children, either teaching in a
classroom or playing outdoors in addition to researching data.
The program is carried out in two main areas: English for adults and children in three
levels (basic, intermediate and advanced) during the afternoons; and Environmental
education for primary and secondary school during the mornings every Thursday.

6.1 English Language Programme
This has been the second phase of the new format: only Thursday afternoons from 4:30 to
6:00pm and 6:30 to 8:00pm. This new format’s worked quite well. We had a very good
attendance. Unfortunately, the H1N1 Influenza situation dramatically affected the whole
country in general, but specifically Mahahual due to the lack of tourism which is the base
of economy. Without cruise ships, there is little local employment, so members of the local
population returned to family homes (often Chetumal), schools were closed and large
gatherings of people were forbidden. This resulted in poor attendance for the lessons by
the end of the phase. We hope next phase brings the success we’ve had in previous
phases.
6.2 Environmental Education
This program takes place in the primary school every Thursday from 9:30 to 10:30am and,
in the secondary school from 11:30 to 12:30pm. As mentioned above, schools were
closed, so we were not able to reach the students for several weeks until the school
reopened.
6.3 Other Programmes and Activities
6.3.1 Dive into Earth Day
On April 22nd, GVI joins many other people around the globe celebrating Earth day. This
annual event was instated to raise awareness and demonstrate the importance of the
environment by providing activities with insightful information, promoting terrestrial and
marine conservation. Since its presence in Mahahual, GVI has organized events for this
day, last year and this year being one of our most successful ones, offering diving and
snorkelling to the school children of Mahahual, and also spent the morning playing
educational games on the beach with some of the students, whilst others attended a
puppet show regarding the importance of the symbiosis of zooxantheli algae and polyps of
the corals.

There was also a Bubble Maker session for the older children given by the GVI scuba
instructors and the help of EMs. This last activity took place at Matan Ka’an hotel, which,
since last year has kindly lent us their facilities. This was a very special and successful day
for all of us. Expectations were exceeded by EMs, staff and school teachers alike.
Figure 6.1 Earth day activities Figure 6.2 Bubble maker

7. Marine Litter Monitoring Programme
7.1 Introduction
Phase 092 saw the beginning of the marine litter collection program at Punta Gruesa.
Marine litter is prevalent along the Caribbean coast and is not only unsightly but a health
hazard to marine life and humans alike. In order to collect more data on this issue a beach
clean program will be conducted every phase. This is part of a worldwide program and is
just one method of investigation to discover where marine litter originates from and which
materials are most common.
Figure 7.1 Marine litter washed up on the beach at Punta Gruesa
Objectives of the beach clean programme

1. Quantified data and photographic evidence as to the extent of marine litter.
2. Conservation of terrestrial and marine fauna threatened by litter.
3. Improvement of beach aesthetics.
7.2 Methodology
Marine litter is collected weekly on a 200 metre stretch of beach north of base. The
transect is cleared one week prior to the commencement of the monitoring program, in

order that only a weekly amount of debris is recorded. Materials are collected from the
tidemark to the vegetation line to eliminate waste created by inland terrestrial sources.
The waste is separated, weighed and recorded by the categories below:

• Fabric
• Glass
• Plastic
• Polystyrene
• Metal
• Natural material (modified)
• Medical waste
• Rubber
• Rope
• Other
7.3 Results
Seven beach cleans were conducted this phase. The highest percentage of litter by weight
collected was plastic (53%) with the next largest group óther´ (21%). There was no fabric
or medical waste collected, and only a small amount of metal, polystyrene and
paper/cardboard (Figure 7.3-1).
Figure 7.2 Marine litter collected as % of total weight

Table 7.1 represents the total litter collected by each category weight. As shown in the
previous graph plastic again accounts for the greatest weight of litter collected.
Total fish in phase Fish per transect
Fabric (0kg) Natural material (modified) (4.1kg)
Glass (4.08kg) Medical waste (0kg)
Plastic (41.95kg) Rubber (3kg)
Polystyrene (1.29kg) Rope (7.07kg)

Metal (0.12kg) Other (16.85kg)
Table 7.1 Marine litter collected as actual weight (kg)
 
 
7.4 Discussion
The beach at Punta Gruesa directly faces the Caribbean current, which originates from the
equatorial Atlantic Ocean and transports significant amounts of water north-westwards
through the Caribbean Sea and into the Gulf of Mexico via the Yucatan current (Gyory,
2006). It is possible that litter is driven by the Caribbean current towards the shores of the
Yucatan and therefore originates from quite far afield. This is compounded by boat traffic
in the Caribbean and outflows from rivers and storm drains etc. It is likely that weather
changes affecting sea turbulence and tide-lines will affect the amounts of marine debris
being washed up.
It was noted in the data collected that there was an increased amount of litter after a week
of storms or high winds. This could be due to a greater level of sea turbulence.
As can be seen from the results plastic is the most prevalent material collected. Plastic is
one of the most damaging materials as it is does not break down easily and can persist for
long periods of time in the marine environment. It is a hazard to marine life as it can cause
entrapment or be ingested.

However, the results produced need to be examined further as they do not account for
volume of material collected only weight. Plastic is generally a light material, as is
polystyrene, so even a huge volume of these materials would possibly weigh the same as
a small amount of metal. Unfortunately it is not possible to measure the volume of the
materials collected. Furthermore, due to the weight of the different types of debris they can
travel further in the ocean. For example, a plastic bag weighs little and can be carried far
by the ocean. But a metal drum is heavy and is therefore likely to sink at the site where it is
deposited.
In the results the Other category accounted for the second greatest weight of all debris
collected. This category comprised of three items made of concrete, tar and ceramic. As a
result the individual weight of these materials meant that the category accounted for a
larger percentage of the total weight collected than was perhaps representative.
Although efforts are made to collect only marine debris, it is clear that not all litter is
washed ashore and that some part of it, as yet unquantified, comes from recreational
shore activities and people visiting the beach.

8. Bird Monitoring Programme
A bird monitoring programme was initiated in April 2009 at GVI Punta Gruesa.
Objectives
• Develop a species list for the area
• Gain an idea of the abundance and diversity of bird species. Long-term bird data
gathered over a sustained period could highlight trends not noticeable to short-term
surveys.
• Educate the expedition members in bird identification techniques, expanding on
their general identification skills. The birding project also provides a good
opportunity to obtain a better understanding of area diversity and the ecosystem as
a whole.
7.1 Introduction
With regard to avi-fauna, Mexico, Central and South America can be divided into three
distinct regions separated by mountain ranges: the Pacific slope, the Interior and the
Atlantic slope. These regions can be further divided into other sub-zones, based on a
variety of habitats.
The Yucatan Peninsula lies on the Atlantic slope and is geographically very different from
the rest of Mexico: a low-level limestone shelf on the east coast extending north into the
Caribbean. The vegetation ranges from rainforest in the south to arid scrub environments
in the north. The coastlines are predominantly sandy beaches but also include extensive
networks of mangroves and lagoons, providing a wide variety of habitats capable of
supporting large resident populations of birds.
Due to the location of the Yucatan peninsula, its population of resident breeders is
significantly enlarged by seasonal migrants. There are four different types of migratory
birds: Winter visitors migrate south from North America during the winter, from August to
May. Summer residents live and breed in Mexico but migrate to South America for the
winter months. Transient migrants are birds that breed in North America and migrate to
South America in the winter but stop or pass through Mexico. Pelagic visitors are birds that
live offshore but stop or pass through the region.

Punta Gruesa is located near the town of Mahahual close to the Mexico/Belize border
between a network of mangrove lagoons and the Caribbean Sea. The local area contains
three key ecosystems; wetland, forest and marine environments.
8.2 Methodology
Bird monitoring surveys are conducted using a simple methodology based on the bird
monitoring program at Pez Maya. A member of staff and one or two EM’s monitor one of
four transects daily between 6 and 7a.m. There are four transects - Beach south, Beach
north, Road south and Road north. These transects were selected to cover a range of
habitats, including coastline, mangroves, secondary growth and shrub. The transects are
completed in around 30 minutes to allow for consistency of data. To reduce duplication of
data, recordings are taken in one direction only to avoid double-counting where individuals
are very active or numerous. Birds are identified using binoculars, cameras and a range of
bird identification books. If the individual species cannot be identified then birds are
recorded to family level (eg. Oriole sp.). Each survey records the following information -
location, date, start time, end time, name of recorders and number of each species seen.
Wind and cloud cover have also been recorded to allow consideration of physical
parameters.
8.3 Results
In total 737 birds were recorded to species level and 29 birds to genus level in the 092
phase. A total of 21 species were seen. 60% of the total birds seen were the Great Tailed
Grackle. Aside from the Grackle the most commonly seen birds (with over 20 individuals
seen) were the Tropical Mockingbird, Brown Pelican, Magnificent Frigatebird, Royal Tern
and the Golden Fronted Woodpecker.
8.4 Discussion
The Great Tailed Grackle, Brown Pelican and Magnificent Frigate were the most frequently
sighted birds on the transect. However, they are also the most visible and easily
identifiable species. The large Grackle population is centered around base and is attracted

by the organic waste produced. Therefore, it would be expected that a high proportion of
birds sighted would be the Grackle. In addition the Punta Gruesa base is located next to a
fishermen’s recidence. Frigate birds often feed on the fisherman’s discarded fish entrails
leading to higher numbers in the local area.
The most commonly sighted birds are resident breeders in the area so a stable population
of these year round would be expected. Data collection in future phases will allow for a
comparison of their prescence throughout the year. Further data is also needed to enable
studies of resident and migratory populations in the area which will be possible over future
phases.
Wind and cloud conditions were recorded on the transects to allow for comparison of the
physical parameters with the data collected. During the first five weeks of the phase there
was high wind and dense cloud cover on most transects conducted. These conditions
hamper data collection as visual and audible identification is made more difficult. With
improved weather conditions it would be expected that more birds will be recorded.
The current transects do not allow for access to the lagoon system behind the mangroves
therefore the wading birds are not accurately represented in the data. In future phases
attempts will be made to create a transect through the mangrove to provide access to the
lagoon.
8.5 Limitations and error
Following staff attendance at a bird identification course revision of the data was
necessary as mis-identification had previously occurred. For example, the Couch and
Tropical Kingbird have virtually identical plumage and can only be identified from each
other by their call. In consequence, all Tropical Kingbirds that had been recorded were
altered to Kingbird sp. Also in light of this course other members of staff and EM’s received
extra training and advice to encourage them to identify species accurately.
One of the greatest variables on this program is the experience level of the observers.
Initially they are inexperienced and are likely to mis-identify species, as they gain more
knowledge they will become more familiar with them and more capable of recording
accurately. It is imperative therefore that their original identifications are correct otherwise
mis-identification could continue throughout the phase.

At present the data set is not sufficiently accurate and the program has not been running
for a necessary period of time to obtain scientifically valid information regarding
populations in the area. It has achieved the goal of providing an idea of species diversity
in the area, improving identification skills, and increasing awareness of the ecosystem
among the EMs.
Further workshops and courses with local bird experts will be undertaken to improve the
accuracy of data collected. An improvement in the recording of bird species combined with
a longer period of monitoring should allow for the analysis of more valid data in future
phases.

9. References
AGRRA (2000) Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA). The AGRRA Rapid
Assessment Protocol. http://www.agrra.org/method/methodhome.htm
Almada-Villela P.C., Sale P.F., Gold-Bouchot G. and Kjerfve B. (2003) Manual of Methods for the
MBRS Synoptic Monitoring System: Selected Methods for Monitoring Physical and Biological
Parameters for Use in the Mesoamerican Region. Mesoamerican Barrier Reef Systems Project
(MBRS). http://www.mbrs.org.bz.
Aronson R.B. and Precht W.F. (2001) White-band disease and the changing face of Caribbean
coral reefs.Hydrobiologia 460: 25-38.
Beach, K., Walters, L, Borgeas, H, Smith, C., Coyer, J., Vroom P. (2003) The impact of Dictyota
spp. on Halimeda populations of Conch Reef, Florida Keys. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 297: 141-159.
Bezaury, J.C., C.L. Sántos, J. McCann, C. Molina Islas, J. Carranza, P. Rubinoff, G. Townsend,
et al. 1998. Participatory Coastal and Marine Management in Quintana Roo, Mexico.
Proceedings: International Tropical Marine Ecosystems Management Symposium (ITMEMS). 9.
Connell, J. H. (1978). Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs.Science199:1302–1310.
Deloach, N. (1999) Reef fish behaviour: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas. New World Publications.
Artegrafica. Verona, Italy.
Edmunds, P.J. and Carpenter, R.C. (2001) Recovery of Diadema antillarum reduces macroalgal
cover and increases abundance of juvenile corals on a Caribbean reef. PNAS 98(9): 5067-5071.
Gardener, T.A., Cote, I.M., Gill, J.A., Grant, A., Watkinson, A.R. (2005) Hurricanes and Caribbean
Coral Reefs: Impacts, recovery patterns, and role in long-term decline. Ecology 86(1): 174-184.
Gardener, T.A., Cote, I.M., Gill, J.A., Grant, A., Watkinson, A.R. (2003) Long-term region-wide
declines in Caribbean corals. Science 301: 958-960.
Humann, P. and Deloach, N. (2003) Reef Fish Identification: Florida, Caribbean Bahamas. New
World Publications.Star Standard Industries, Jacksonville, FL.
Kenyon, J.C., Vroom, P.S., Page, K.N., Dunlap, M.J., Wilkinson C.B., Aeby, G.S. (2006)
Community Structure of Hermatypic Corals at French Frigate Shoals,NorthwesternHawaiian
Islands: Capacity for Resistance and Resilience to Selective Stressors. Pacific Science 60(2): 153-
175.
Kuffner, I.B., Walters, L.J., Becerro, M.A., Paul, V.J., Ritson-Williams, R. and Beach, K.S. (2006)
Inhibition of coral recruitment by macroalgae and cyanobacteria. Marine Ecology Progress Series
323: 107-117
Lee, A.S. and Dooley, R.E. (1998) Coral Reefs of the Caribbean, The Bahamas and Florida.
Macmillan Education Ltd, London.

Littler, D.S, Littler, M.M, Bucher, K.E. and Norris, J.N. (1989) Marine Plants of the Caribbean: A
Field Guide from Florida to Brazil. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
McClanahan, T.R. and Muthiga, N.A. (1998) An ecological shift in a remote coral atoll of Belize over
25 years. Environmental Conservation 25: 122-130.
NOAA, 2006.NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected

resources.http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/
Nugues, M.M, and Roberts, C.M. (2003) Partial mortality in massive reef corals as an indicator of
sediment stress on coral reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46: 314-323.
Spalding, M.D. and Jarvis, G.E. (2002). The impact of the 1998 coral mortality on reef fish
communities in the Seychelles. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44: 309-321.
UNEP-WCMC (2006). In the front line: shoreline protection and other ecosystem services from
mangroves and coral reefs. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK.
Yentsch, C.S., Yentsch, C.M., Cullen, J.J., Lapointe, B., Phinney, D.A., Yentsch, S.W. (2002)
Sunlight and Water Transparency: cornerstones in coral research. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 268: 171-183.

10. Appendices
Apendix A – SMP Methodology Outlines
Buddy method 1: Surveys of corals, algae and other sessile organisms
At each monitoring site five replicate 30m transect lines are deployed randomly within
100m of the GPS point. The transect line is laid across the reef surface at a constant
depth, usually perpendicular to the reef slope. The recent discovery of two Spur and
Groove sites (DP & LG) at a depth of 20m will allow for additional future monitoring. In
keeping with Scuba diving profiles at such depths, 10m transect lines will be used in order
to provide sufficient time to successfully complete monitoring surveys and return to the
surface safely. Owing to the nature of the Spur and Groove reef orientation, transects will
be laid perpendicular to the shoreline.
The first diver of this monitoring buddy pair collects data on the characterisation of the
coral community under the transect line. Swimming along the transect line the diver
identifies, to species level, each hermatypic coral directly underneath the transect that is at
least 10cm at its widest point and in the original growth position. If a colony has been
knocked or has fallen over, it is only recorded if it has become reattached to the
substratum. In addition to identifying the coral to species level, the diver also records the
water depth at the top of the corals, at the beginning and end of each transect. In cases
where bottom topography is very irregular, or the size of the individual corals is very
variable, water depth is recorded at the top of each coral beneath the transect line at any
major change in depth (greater than 1m).
The diver then identifies the colony boundaries based on verifiable connective or common
skeleton. Using a measuring pole, the colonies projected diameter (live plus dead areas) in
plan view and maximum height (live plus dead areas) from the base of the colonies
substratum are measured.
From plane view perspective, the percentage of coral that is not healthy (separated into
old dead and recent dead) is also estimated.

The first diver also notes any cause of mortality including diseases and/or predation and
any bleached tissue present. The diseases are characterised using the following ten
categories:
o Black band disease o Red band disease

o White band disease o Hyperplasm and Neoplasm (irregular growths)
o White plague o Predation and type
o Yellow blotch disease o Bleaching and type
o Dark spot disease o Unknown
The second diver measures the percentage cover of sessile organisms and substrate
along the 30m transect, recording the nature of the substrate or organism directly every
25cm along the transect. Organisms are classified into the following groups:
Coralline algae - crusts or finely branched algae that are hard (calcareous) and extend no
more than 2cm above the substratum
Turf algae - may look fleshy and/or filamentous but do not rise more than 1cm above the
substrate
Macroalgae - include fleshy and calcareous algae whose fronds are projected more than
1cm above the substrate. Three of these are further classified into additional groups,
which include Halimeda, Dictyota, and Lobophora
Gorgonians
Hermatypic corals - to species level, where possible
Bare rock, sand and rubble
Any other sessile organisms e.g. sponges, tunicates, zoanthids, hydroids and crinoids.
Where possible, these are recorded to order or family.
Buddy method 2: Belt transect counts for coral reef fish
At each monitoring site 8 replicate 30m transects lines are deployed randomly within 100m
of the GPS point. The transect line is laid just above the reef surface at a constant depth,
usually perpendicular to the reef slope. The first diver is responsible for swimming slowly

along the transect line identifying, counting and estimating the sizes of specific indicator
fish species (Appendix B) in their adult phase. The diver visually estimates a two metre by
two metre ‘corridor’ and carries a one meter T-bar divided into 10cm graduations to aid the
accuracy of the size estimation of the fish identified. The fish are assigned to the following
size categories:
0-5cm 20-30cm
5-10cm 30-40cm
10-20cm >40cm (with size specified)
The buddy pair then waits for three minutes at a short distance from the end of the
transect line before proceeding. This allows juvenile fish to return to their original positions
before they were potentially scared off by the divers during the adult transect. The second
diver swims slowly back along the transect surveying a one metre by one metre ‘corridor’
and identifying and counting the presence of newly settled fish of the target species
(Appendix C). In addition to rolling in the tape, it is also the diver’s responsibility to identify
and count the Banded Shrimp, Stenopus hispidus. This is a collaborative effort with UNAM
to track this species as their population is slowly dwindling due to their direct removal for
the aquarium trade. The adult diver also counts any Diadema antillarum individuals found
on the transects whilst rolling in the tape. This is aimed at tracking the slow come back of
these urchins.
Buddy Method 3: Coral & Fish Rover divers
At each monitoring site the third buddy pair completes a thirty minute survey of the site in
an expanding square pattern, with one diver recording all adult fish species observed. The
approximate density of each fish species is categorised using the following numerations:
Single (1 fish)
Few (2-10 fish)
Many (11-100 fish)
Abundant (>100 fish)

The second diver swims along side the Fish Rover diver and records, to species level, all
coral communities observed, regardless of size. The approximate density of each coral
species is then categorised using similar ranges to those for fish:
Single (1 community)
Few (2-10 communities)
Many (11-50 communities)
Abundant (>50 communities)
Analyzing the rover data provides a broader view of additional organisms that may
constitute the reef site but that may not be represented from the randomly placed transect
lies. In the case of fish data, the rover data aids in collecting population size information of
target species that may keep away from a transect line due to the intimidating and possibly
invasive nature of unnatural objects and divers on the reef.

Appendix B. Species List of adult fish that are recorded during monitoring dives.
Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common Name

Acanthurus coeruleus, Blue Tang Scarus guacamaia Rainbow Parrotfish
Acanthurus bahianus, Ocean Surgeonfish Scarus vetula Queen Parrotfish
Acanthurus chirurgus, Doctorfish Sparisoma viride Stoplight Parrotfish
Chaetodon striatus, Banded Butterflyfish Scarus taeniopterus Princess Parrotfish
Chaetodon capistratus, Four Eye Butterflyfish Scarus iserti Striped Parrotfish
Chaetodon ocellatus, Spotfin Butterflyfish Sparisoma aurofrenatum Redband Parrotfish
Chaetodon aculeatus, Longsnout Butterflyfish Sparisoma chrysopterum Redtail Parrotfish
Haemulon flavolineatum French Grunt Sparisoma rubripinne Yellowtail Parrotfish
Haemulon striatum Striped Grunt Sparisoma atomarium Greenblotch Parrotfish
Haemulon plumierii White Grunt Sparisoma radians Bucktooth Parrotfish
Haemulon sciurus Bluestriped Grunt Epinephelus itajara Goliath Grouper
Haemulon carbonarium Caesar Grunt Epinephelus striatus Nassau Grouper
Haemulon chrysargyreum Smallmouth Grunt Mycteroperca venenosa Yellowfin Grouper
Haemulon aurolineatum Tomtate Mycteroperca bonaci Black Grouper
Haemulon melanurum Cottonwick Mycteroperca tigris Tiger Grouper
Haemulon macrostomum Spanish Grunt Mycteroperca interstitialis Yellowmouth Grouper
Haemulon parra Sailor’s Choice Epinephelus guttatus Red Hind
Haemulon album White Margate Epinephelus adscensionis Rock Hind
Anisotremus virginicus Porkfish Cephalopholis cruentatus Graysby
Anisotremus surinamensis Black Margate Cephalopholis fulvus Coney
Lutjanus analis Mutton Snapper Balistes vetula Queen Triggerfish
Lutjanus griseus Gray Snapper Balistes capriscus Gray Triggerfish
Lutjanus cyanopterus Cubera Snapper Canthidermis sufflamen Ocean Triggerfish
Lutjanus jocu Dog Snapper Xanithichthys ringens Sargassum Triggerfish
Lutjanus mahogoni Mahaogany Snapper Melichthys niger Black Durgon
Lutjanus apodus Schoolmaster Aluterus scriptus Scrawled Filefish
Lutjanus synagris Lane Snapper Cantherhines pullus Orangespotted Filefish
Ocyurus chrysurus Yellowtail Snapper Cantherhines macrocerus Whitespotted Filefish
Holacanthus ciliaris Queen Angelfish Bodianus rufus Spanish Hogfish
Pomacanthus paru French Angelfish Lachnolaimus maximus Hogfish
Pomacanthus arcuatus Grey Angelfish Caranx rubber Bar Jack
Holacanthus tricolour Rock Beauty Microspathodon chrysurus Yellowtail Damselfish
Scarus coeruleus Blue Parrotfish Sphyraena barracuda Great Barracuda
Scarus coelestinus Midnight Parrotfish

Appendix C - Juvenile Fish Indicator Species List
The subsequent list specifies the juvenile fish species and their maximum target length that
are recorded during monitoring div
Scientific Name Common Name Max. target length

(cm)
Acanthurus bahianus Ocean surgeonfish 5
Acanthurus coeruleus Blue tang 5
Chaetodon capistratus Foureye butterflyfish 2
Chaetodon striatus Banded butterflyfish 2
Gramma loreto Fairy basslet 3
Bodianus rufus Spanish hogfish 3.5
Halichoeres bivittatus Slipperydick 3
Halichoeres garnoti Yellowhead wrasse 3
Halichoeres maculipinna Clown wrasse 3
Thalassoma bifasciatum Bluehead wrasse 3
Halichoeres pictus Rainbow wrasse 3
Chromis cyanea Blue chromis 3.5
Stegastes adustus Dusky damselfish 2.5
Stegastes diencaeus Longfin damselfish 2.5
Stegastes leucostictus Beaugregory 2.5
Stegastes partitus Bicolour damselfish 2.5
Stegastes planifrons Threespot damselfish 2.5
Stegastes variabilis Cocoa damselfish 2.5
Scarus iserti Striped parrotfish 3.5
Scarus taeniopterus Princess parrotfish 3.5
Sparisoma atomarium Greenblotch parrotfish 3.5
Sparisoma aurofrenatum Redband parrotfish 3.5
Sparisoma viride Stoplight parrotfish 3.5

Appendix D - Coral Species List
Family Genus Species Family Genus Species

Acroporidae Acropora cervicornis Meandrinidae Dendrogyra cylindrus
Acroporidae Acropora Palmata Meandrinidae Dichocoenia stokesii
Acroporidae Acropora prolifera Meandrinidae Meandrina meandrites
Agariciidae Agaricia agaricites Milliporidae Millepora alcicornis
Agariciidae Agaricia Fragilis Milliporidae Millepora complanata
Agariciidae Agaricia grahamae Mussidae Isophyllastrea rigida
Agariciidae Agaricia lamarcki Mussidae Isophyllia sinuosa
Agariciidae Agaricia tenuifolia Mussidae Mussa angulosa
Agariciidae Agaricia Undata Mussidae Mycetophyllia aliciae
Agariciidae Helioceris cucullata Mussidae Mycetophyllia ferox
Antipatharia Cirrhipathes Leutkeni Mussidae Mycetophyllia lamarckiana
Astrocoeniidae Stephanocoenia intersepts Mussidae Mycetophyllia Reís
Caryophylliidae Eusmilia fastigiana Mussidae Scolymia sp.
Faviidae Colpophyllia Natans Pocilloporidae Madracis decactis
Faviidae Diploria clivosa Pocilloporidae Madracis formosa
Faviidae Diploria labrynthiformis Pocilloporidae Madracis mirabilis
Faviidae Diploria strigosa Pocilloporidae Madracis pharensis
Faviidae Favia Fragum Poritidae Porites astreoides
Faviidae Manicina areolata Poritidae Porites divaricata
Faviidae Montastraea annularis Poritidae Porites furcata
Faviidae Montastraea cavernosa Poritidae Porites porites
Faviidae Montastraea faveolata Siderastridae Siderastrea radians
Faviidae Montastraea franksi Siderastridae Siderastrea sidereal
Faviidae Solenastrea bournoni Stylasteridae Stylaster roseus
Faviidae Solenastrea hyades

Pta Gruesa (EX67) April-June 2009 Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pta Gruesa (EX67) April-June 2009 Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Vision International,

2009 Report Series No. 002

Punta Gruesa Marine Conservation

Phase Report 092

April – June 2009

Chris Mason-Parker – Field Staff

Dean Tabone Scuba Instructor Liv Fordell Expedition Member

GVI Mexico/Marine Conservation Expedition

Address: Apartado Postal 16, Col Centro, 77710

• Monitoring of strategic sites along the coast.

© Global Vision International – 2009 ii

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 5

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 6

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 7

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 8

2.2.2 Fish Populations

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 9

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 10

Population abundances are determined to an extent by larval recruitment. The vast

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 11

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 12

2.3 Methodology and Training

The Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System Synoptic Monitoring Programme methodology

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 13

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 14

Location Site ID Depth Latitude Longitude

o Buddy method 1: Surveys of corals, algae and other sessile organisms

The separate buddy pair systems are outlined in detail in Appendix A.

2.4 Synoptic Monitoring ProgrammeTraining

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 15

Hazards of the Reef Classification and Taxonomy

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 16

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 17

Table 3.1 Number of transects/adult fish recorded per phase.

3.1.1 Adult fish

Figure 3.1 Total fish biomass per phase

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 18

Figure 3.2 Adult fish familiy percentage abundance by phase

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 19

3.1.2 Juvenile Fish

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 20

Figure 3.4 Percentage abundance of juvenile fish families by phase

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 21

Figure 3.5 Percentage abundance of Surgeonfish and Turf Algae by phase

3.2.1 Adult Fish

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 22

3.2.2 Juvenile Fish

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 23

Frequency of species by site on PI transects

250 Hermatypic Coral

200 Blue Green Algae

Figure 3.6 Frequency of species by site on PI transects

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 24

Abundence of algaes recorded on PI

200 Turf algae

Figure 3.7 Abundance of algaes recorded on PI transects

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 25

Figure 3.8 Comparison of algae presence in 082 and 092

3.3.2 Coral Community Transects

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 26

Figure 3.9 Presence of disease recorded during CC transects

© Global Vision International – 2009 Page 27

Figure 3.10 Frequency of Bleaching recorded during CC transects