An Integrated Assessment of the Introduction of Lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles complex) to the Western Atlantic Ocean.

Lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles complex) are venomous coral reef fishes from the Indian and western Pacific oceans that are now found in the western Atlantic Ocean. Adult lionfish have been observed from Miami, Florida to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, and juvenile lionfish have been observed off North Carolina, New York, and Bermuda. The large number of adults observed and the occurrence of juveniles indicate that lionfish are established and reproducing along the southeast United States coast. Introductions of marine species occur in many ways. Ballast water discharge, a very common method of introduction for marine invertebrates, is responsible for many freshwater fish introductions. In contrast, most marine fish introductions result from intentional stocking for fishery purposes. Lionfish, however, likely were introduced via unintentional or intentional aquarium releases, and the introduction of lionfish into United States waters should lead to an assessment of the threat posed by the aquarium trade as a vector for fish introductions. Currently, no management actions are being taken to limit the effect of lionfish on the southeast United States continental shelf ecosystem. Further, only limited funds have been made available for research. Nevertheless, the extent of the introduction has been documented and a forecast of the maximum potential spread of lionfish is being developed. Under a scenario of no management actions and limited research, three predictions are made: ● With no action, the lionfish population will continue to grow along the southeast United States shelf. ● Effects on the marine ecosystem of the southeast United States will become more noticeable as the lionfish population grows. ● There will be incidents of lionfish envenomations of divers and/or fishers along the east coast of the United States. Removing lionfish from the southeast United States continental shelf ecosystem would be expensive and likely impossible. A bounty could be established that would encourage the removal of fish and provide specimens for research. However, the bounty would need to be lower than the price of fish in the aquarium trade (~$25-$50 each) to ensure that captured specimens were from the wild. Such a low bounty may not provide enough incentive for capturing lionfish in the wild. Further, such action would only increase the interaction between the public and lionfish, increasing the risk of lionfish envenomations. As the introduction of lionfish is very likely irreversible, future actions should focus on five areas. 1) The population of lionfish should be tracked. 2) Research should be conducted so that scientists can make better predictions regarding the status of the invasion and the effects on native species, ecosystem function, and ecosystem services. 3) Outreach and education efforts must be increased, both specifically toward lionfish and more generally toward the aquarium trade as a method of fish introductions. 4) Additional regulation should be considered to reduce the frequency of marine fish introduction into U.S. waters. However, the issue is more complicated than simply limiting the import of non-native species, and these complexities need to be considered simultaneously. 5) Health care providers along the east coast of the United States need to be notified that a venomous fish is now resident along the southeast United States. The introduction and spread of lionfish illustrates the difficulty inherent in managing introduced species in marine systems. Introduced species often spread via natural mechanisms after the initial introduction. Efforts to control the introduction of marine fish will fail if managers do not consider the natural dispersal of a species following an introduction. Thus, management strategies limiting marine fish introductions need to be applied over the scale of natural ecological dispersal to be effective, pointing to the need for a regional management approach defined by natural processes not by political boundaries. The introduction and success of lionfish along the east coast should change the long-held perception that marine fish invasions are a minimal threat to marine ecosystems. Research is needed to determine the effects of specific invasive fish species in specific ecosystems. More broadly, a cohesive plan is needed to manage, mitigate and minimize the effects of marine invasive fish species on ecosystems that are already compromised by other human activities. Presently, the magnitude of marine fish introductions as a stressor on marine ecosystems cannot be quantified, but can no longer be dismissed as negligible. (PDF contains 31 pages)

Non-governmental organizations and multi-sited marine conservation science: A case study

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are now major players in the realm of environmental conservation. While many environmental NGOs started as national organizations focused around single-species protection, governmental advocacy, and preservation of wilderness, the largest now produce applied conservation science and work with national and international stakeholders to develop conservation solutions that work in tandem with local aspirations. Marine managed areas (MMAs) are increasingly being used as a tool to manage anthropogenic stressors on marine resources and protect marine biodiversity. However, the science of MMA is far from complete. Conservation International (CI) is concluding a 5 year, $12.5 million dollar Marine Management Area Science (MMAS) initiative. There are 45 scientific projects recently completed, with four main “nodes” of research and conservation work: Panama, Fiji, Brazil, and Belize. Research projects have included MMA ecological monitoring, socioeconomic monitoring, cultural roles monitoring, economic valuation studies, and others. MMAS has the goals of conducting marine management area research, building local capacity, and using the results of the research to promote marine conservation policy outcomes at project sites. How science is translated into policy action is a major area of interest for science and technology scholars (Cash and Clark 2001; Haas 2004; Jasanoff et al. 2002). For science to move policy there must be work across “boundaries” (Jasanoff 1987). Boundaries are defined as the “socially constructed and negotiated borders between science and policy, between disciplines, across nations, and across multiple levels” (Cash et al. 2001). Working across the science-policy boundary requires boundary organizations (Guston 1999) with accountability to both sides of the boundary, among other attributes. (Guston 1999; Clark et al. 2002). This paper provides a unique case study illustrating how there are clear advantages to collaborative science. Through the MMAS initiative, CI built accountability into both sides of the science-policy boundary primarily through having scientific projects fed through strong in-country partners and being folded into the work of ongoing conservation processes. This collaborative, boundary-spanning approach led to many advantages, including cost sharing, increased local responsiveness and input, better local capacity building, and laying a foundation for future conservation outcomes. As such, MMAS can provide strong lessons for other organizations planning to get involved in multi-site conservation science. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Coral health and disease in the Pacific: vision for action

Shallow coral reefs in the IndoPacific contain the highest diversity of marine organisms in the world, with approximately 1500 described species of fish, over 500 species of scleractinian corals, and an estimated 1-10 million organisms yet to be characterized (Reaka-Kudla et al. 1994). These centers of marine biodiversity are facing significant, multiple threats to reef community and habitat structure and function, resulting in local to wide-scale regional damage. Wilkinson (2004) characterized the major pressures as including (1) global climate change, (2) diseases, plagues and invasive species, (3) direct human pressures, (4) poor governance and lack of political will, and (5) international action or inaction. Signs that the natural plasticity of reef ecosystems has been exceeded in many areas from the effects of environmental (e.g., global climate change) and anthropogenic (e.g., land use, pollution) stressors is evidenced by the loss of 20% of the world’s coral reefs (Wilkinson 2004). Predictions are that another 24% (Wilkinson 2006) are under imminent risk of collapse and an additional 26% are under a longer term threat from reduced fitness, disease outbreaks, and increased mortality. These predictions indicate that the current list of approximately 30-40 fatal diseases impacting corals will expand as will the frequency and extent of “coral bleaching” (Waddell 2005; Wilkinson 2004). Disease and corallivore outbreaks, in combination with multiple, concomitant human disturbances are compromising corals and coral reef communities to the point where their ability to rebound from natural disturbances is being lost.

Poverty in the fisheries, inductors, causes and intervention

The study is prompted by the poverty that persisted among the fishing communities of lake victoria at time of considerable cash inflow into the fisheries development of fish processing industry. There has been need for understanding of the poverty and what strategies would be most appreciate for it's reduction.This study has attempted to respond to the needby identifying the nature and distribution of the poverty within the fisheries lake victoria,Uganda, the factor responsible for itand the options for poverty reduction intervention. The study examined the global and regional perspectives of poverty and wealth distribution, noting that wide disparities existed between the developed and the developing world and also between the developing countries themselves. A historical review of development policies and strategies revealed that while successive strategies were able to contribute to growth, their achievement towards poverty alleviation were less than satisfactory, hence the need for continually developing new strategies. A background to Uganda’s society and economy is provided, examining the demographic, political, environmental and economic conditions of the country. Uganda’s development strategies are reviewed, highlighting the role of the Poverty Eradication Action Plan, Uganda’s main strategy for implementing the policy of poverty reduction and wealth distribution. At the agricultural sector level, the Plan for the Modernisation of Agriculture has been formulated, followed by the National Fisheries Policy, aimed at providing a policy framework for the management and development of the fisheries. An appropriate definition of poverty was formulated, considered relevant to the situation of Lake Victoria. The dimensions of poverty included inadequate basic necessities, low education and health achievements, a sense of insecurity and exposure to risk. The research methodology was enhanced by the examination of the Lélé Model of the Poverty–Environmental Degradation problem, the World Bank Model of Poverty Causation and the subsequent Lake Victoria Model developed in this study. It has provided a plan for the research, the consideration of criteria and a data collection plan. The data collection instruments included secondary data search, key informant interviews and a sample survey based on a structured questionnaire. The study identified all the four dimensions of poverty in the fisheries, provided poverty profiles with respect to the different activities, groups of people and regions in the fisheries, based on consumption poverty. Among the people identified to be in poverty were the fishing labourers, fishers of Oreochromis niloticus and those operating with non-powered boats. In the post-harvest fisheries, large proportions of processors involved in salting and sun-drying, market stall and bicycle traders were in the poverty category. The ethnic groups most affected included the Samia, Basoga and Bakenye while the Districts of Jinja, Bugiri and Busia had the highest proportions of fishers in the poverty category. With respect to the other dimensions of poverty, the study showed that educational achievement was low within the fishing communities. The health status was poor, due mainly to the prevalence of malaria, diarrhoea, bilharzia and HIV/AIDS. There was a sense of insecurity within certain sections of the fishing community, due to leadership weaknesses within the local as well as the Government institutions. Some community members operated in a state of risk because they were vulnerable to episodes of income, health and education. The causes of poverty in fisheries included weaknesses within the institutional and social environment, limitations in the technology available to the poor, resource degradation and unfavourable economic factors. The recommendations of the study for poverty reduction included strengthening of policies, developing links, improving capacities and increasing resources, to be applied at the levels of Central Government, Local Government and of the community. In view of the achievements of the methodology used on this study, involving reference to the models, it is recommended that future research should build upon this model approach, as it will continue to produce results, especially when attempting to forecast changes relating to interventions.