Study

Effects of fishing on a temperate reef community in South Africa 2: benthic invertebrates and algae

  • Published source details Götz A., Kerwath S.E., Attwood C.G. & Sauer W.H. (2009) Effects of fishing on a temperate reef community in South Africa 2: benthic invertebrates and algae. African Zoology, 31, 253-262.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified)

Action Link
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

Cease or prohibit all types of fishing in a marine protected area

Action Link
Marine Fish Conservation
  1. Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified)

    A site comparison study in 2001–2004 in areas of seabed in the Indian Ocean, off the south coast of South Africa (Götz et al. 2009) found that sites inside a marine protected area closed to fishing (exact restrictions unspecified) had a different overall invertebrate and algae community composition and abundances of three of five species groups compared to adjacent fished sites. Community data were presented as graphical analyses. Protected sites had statistically higher abundance (as percentage cover) of sponges (25%) and hydrozoans (9%) compared to fished sites (sponges: 19%; hydrozoans: 7%), lower abundance of sea lilies (closed: 6% vs fished: 10%), and similar abundances of sea quirts (15% vs 13%) and bryozoans (20% vs 24%) than fished sites. Annually in 2001–2004, video footage was recorded at 10–30 m depth at 2–7 sites surveyed inside the protected area (year of designation unspecified), and 4–13 sites outside. At each site, a 225 m2 area was video-recorded. Footage was analysed and cover of five invertebrate taxa and algae assessed.

    (Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson & Laura Pettit)

  2. Cease or prohibit all types of fishing in a marine protected area

    A site comparison study in 2000–2004 of an area of reef in the Indian Ocean, off South Africa (Götz et al. 2009) found that prohibiting all types of fishing in a marine protected area for over 10 years resulted in a different fish community, higher diversity and a higher abundance of four of the eight most common fish species compared to an adjacent fished reef. Fish community composition was found to differ between unfished and fished areas using both sampling methods and diversity was higher in the unfished area for the visual census survey only (unfished: 1.7, fished: 1.5). For both sampling methods, frequencies of roman Chrysoblephus laticeps, steentjie Spondyliosoma emarginatum, dreamfish Sarpa salpa and blacktail Diplodus sargus capensis were higher in the unfished area (unfished: 8–55%, fished: 5–36%) and fransmadam Boopsoidea inornata, blue hottentot Pachymetopon aeneum, santer Cheimerius nufar and dageraad Chrysoblephus cristiceps were lower (unfished: <1–14%, fished: <1–42%; see paper for species individual data by method). Fish were sampled inside and outside the Goukamma Marine Protected Area (40 km2, all fishing prohibited since 1990) using two methods: standardised angling (111 sites inside, 162 outside) and underwater visual census (15 inside, 29 outside 44 sites). Angling surveys were carried out in all seasons from 2000 to 2003 by a team of 3–5 anglers. Seasonally in 2001–2004, fish were counted by divers in an area of up to 5 m radius.

    (Summarised by: Chris Barrett)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust