Study

Movement patterns of surf-zone fish species in a subtropical marine protected area on the east coast of South Africa

  • Published source details Mann B., Cowley P. & Fennessy S. (2015) Movement patterns of surf-zone fish species in a subtropical marine protected area on the east coast of South Africa. African Journal of Marine Science, 37, 99-114.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Control human activity in a marine protected area with a zonation system of restrictions

Action Link
Marine Fish Conservation

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

Action Link
Marine Fish Conservation
  1. Control human activity in a marine protected area with a zonation system of restrictions

    A site comparison study in 2001–2013 of four surf-zone sites in the Indian Ocean, off South Africa (Mann et al. 2015) found that the majority of recaptures of tagged fish from five species made over a nine-year period, occurred inside a marine reserve where fishing activity was controlled by zones, mainly in the no-take zone where all fishing has been banned for over 20 years. Most individuals of the five main study species were recaptured within 200 m of their original release site: grey grunter Pomadasys furcatus: 88%, catface rockcod Epinephelus andersoni: 84%, yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus: 92%, cavebass Dinoperca petersi: 88% and speckled snapper Lutjanus rivulatus: 79%. Overall, 61% of fish were originally tagged at sites in the no-take zone and the rest in the zone that allows shore angling, recreational boat angling and spearfishing for pelagic gamefish only. In addition, the maximum times between release and capture ranged from 287–3,163 days; average recapture rate was 29%, and 632 of the 3,224 fish tagged were recaptured at least once. The St Lucia Marine Reserve in South Africa was established in 1979. From November 2001– 2013, a total of 6,613 fish from 71 species were tagged and released at four sites in the reserve: two in a no-take zone and two in a restricted fishing zone. Over the same sampling period, details of fish recaptured in the reserve by the research team and angling public, and other reported recaptures in fished areas outside the reserve were recorded.

    (Summarised by: Khatija Alliji/Natasha Taylor)

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

    A replicated study in 2001–2013 of four surf-zone sites in the Indian Ocean, off South Africa (Mann et al. 2015) found that over a nine-year period, the majority of recaptures made of tagged fish from five species, occurred inside a marine reserve where fishing activity was controlled by zones, and mainly within 200 m of their original release site in the no-take reserve zone closed to all fishing for over 22 years (and thus spent more time in areas protected from fishing). Most individuals of the five main study species were recaptured within 200 m of their original release site (grey grunter Pomadasys furcatus: 88%, catface rockcod Epinephelus andersoni: 84%, yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus: 92%, cave bass Dinoperca petersi: 88% and speckled snapper Lutjanus rivulatus: 79%) and 61% of fish were originally tagged at sites in the no-take zone, the rest in the zone that allows shore angling and recreational boat angling and spearfishing for pelagic gamefish only. In addition, the maximum time at liberty of each species ranged from 287–3,163 days, average recapture rate was 29% and 632 of the 3,224 fish tagged were recaptured at least once. The St Lucia Marine Reserve in South Africa was established in 1979. From November 2001–2013, a total of 6,613 fish from 71 species were tagged and released at four sites in the reserve: two in a no-take zone and two in a restricted fishing zone. Over the same sampling period, details of fish recaptured in the reserve by the research team and angling public, and other reported recaptures in fished areas outside the reserve were recorded.

    (Summarised by: Natasha Taylor)

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