Community biomass and life history benchmarks for coral reef fisheries

The status of fisheries requires establishing and evaluating benchmarks derived from unfished ecosystems. Habitats, environmental conditions, properties of the fish communities and management systems could potentially influence the variability surrounding benchmarks. Consequently, eighteen variables including habitat, number of species, life histories, thermal and productivity environments were tested for influences on reef fish biomass in 62 reefs within old high compliance closures along the east African coastline. Biomass and weighted life history characteristics were classified and described for total, fishable, target and non‐target groups. Benchmark biomass fell within a 95% confidence interval of ~1,030–1,250 kg/ha and equally distributed among target and non‐target groups. While some relationships were statistically significant, most were weak, poorly sampled (ocean exposed reefs), had uncertain relationships with biomass (number of species), or the explained variation was bounded within the above confidence intervals (habitat and environment). Therefore, a regional unfished biomass benchmark (B₀) of 1,150 and 560 kg/ha is recommended for total and target biomasses, respectively. Weighted life history metrics indicate that the target had slower life histories than the non‐target fish communities. Consequently, they will be fished unsustainably if yield recommendations are derived from the total, resilient or non‐target fish life history metrics. The intrinsic rates of increase (r) and target categorization of biomass were the most influential metrics in estimating yields.     

Coral reef fish communities in management systems with unregulated fishing and small fisheries closures compared with lightly fished reefs – Maldives vs. Kenya

• 1. This study presents a comparison of the benthic cover and fish communities in three widely different management systems: (1) a heavily utilized subsistence fishery (yields >5 Mg km^?2 yr^?1); (2) moderately sized and well enforced fisheries closures (～9% of the nearshore area) surrounded by heavy fishing; and (3) a more lightly used management system (yields <5 Mg km^?2 yr^?1).
• 2. The objective was to compare management systems of small to moderate‐sized closures surrounded by heavy use in Kenya with a large‐scale light‐use management system in the Maldives.
• 3. Gross level attributes of the fish community suggest that the Maldives reefs had higher numbers of individuals (30%) and species (15%) than the Kenyan closures.
• 4. Maldivian reefs had higher abundance of some carnivores such as emperors (Lethrinidae), jacks (Carangidae), triggerfish (Balistidae), and trumpetfishes (Aulostomidae). Half the biomass of fish in the Maldives was, however, composed of surgeonfish (Acanthuridae), which resulted in a higher abundance of herbivores/detritivores than found in Kenyan closures.
• 5. Apex predator species were not a large portion of the biomass (<10%) in any system and, if remote reefs of the Pacific are examples of undisturbed ecosystems, then neither management system has fully protected apex species.

Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.