Subtidal Reef Health Program: Baseline Status Of Subtidal .

1y ago
3 Views
2 Downloads
3.47 MB
102 Pages
Last View : 21d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Jenson Heredia
Transcription

Subtidal Reef Health Program: Baseline status of subtidalreefs and associated biodiversity patterns in the AMLRregion.James Brook, Kristian Peters, Simon Bryars, Sam Owen, Jamie Hicks,David Miller, Daniel Easton, Yvette Eglington, Craig Meakin and DannyBrockDepartment for Environment and WaterFebruary, 2020DEW Technical report DEW-TR-2020-01

Department for Environment and WaterGPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001TelephoneNational (08) 8463 6946International 61 8 8463 6946FaxNational (08) 8463 6999International 61 8 8463 6999Websitewww.environment.sa.gov.auDisclaimerThe Department for Environment and Water and its employees do not warrant or make any representationregarding the use, or results of the use, of the information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy,reliability, currency or otherwise. The Department for Environment and Water and its employees expresslydisclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. Information contained in thisdocument is correct at the time of writing.With the exception of the Piping Shrike emblem, other material or devices protected by Aboriginal rights or atrademark, and subject to review by the Government of South Australia at all times, the content of this documentis licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence. All other rights are reserved. Crown in right of the State of South Australia, through the Department for Environment and Water 2020ISBN 978-1-925964-30-1Preferred way to cite this publicationBrook J, Peters K, Bryars S, Owen S, Hicks J, Miller D, Easton D, Eglington Y, Meakin C & Brock D (2020). SubtidalReef Health Program: Baseline status of subtidal reefs and associated biodiversity patterns in the AMLR, DEWTechnical report DEW-TR-2020-01, Government of South Australia, Department for Environment and Water,Adelaide.Download this document at https://data.environment.sa.gov.auCover photograph: Danny Brock, Ornate cowfish (Arcana ornata)DEW Technical report 2020/01i

ContentsExecutive Summaryvii110Introduction1.1Subtidal Rocky Reefs1.3Health of Rocky Reefs in the AMLR region1.21.41.52Subtidal Reef Health ProgramObjectivesMethods2.1Baseline data collection2.2.1Rationale2.22.2.22.33Natural resources management frameworkIndicators of Reef statusDefinition and context of indicatorsEvaluation of monitoring sitesCharacteristics of AMLR reefs3.1Physical characteristics3.2.1General al communitiesSubregional featuresFish al features25Mobile invertebrate communities28Subregional featuresGeneral featuresSubregional features2728294Fish species of conservation concern315Baseline status of reef monitoring sites365.1Macroalgae and sessile invertebrates5.1.2Macroalgal community .65.35.3.15.3.2Richness of functional groupsCover of canopy-forming macroalgaeFish3636373738Species richness38Biomass of targeted fish40Community temperature index42Biomass of large fishFish community structureFocal fish speciesInvertebratesSpecies richnessMobile invertebrate community structureDEW Technical report 2020/01394144484849ii

5.3.36Evaluation of long term monitoring sites6.1Review of representative criteria6.3Evaluation of monitoring sites6.27Focal speciesReview of catchment discharge criteriaConclusions7.1Overview7.3Regional baseline established for future monitoring7.27.47.57.67.77.87.97.10Subregional approach will improve management of subtidal reefsMacroalgal communities49545454576060606061Fish communities61Introduced Marine Pests63Mobile invertebrate biodiversity62Catchment impacts63Contribution to NRM reporting and ecosystem assessment64Site evaluation648Recommendations659Appendices67A.Sites surveyedC.Species listsB.D.E.10Details of indicator calculations and interpretation notesOutputs from PRIMER/PERMANOVA Baseline condition of subregions and sites in the AMLR region6869727987Units of measurement9711Glossary9812References9810.1Units of measurement commonly used (SI and non-SI Australian legal)DEW Technical report 2020/0197iii

List of figuresFigure 1. Sites surveyed during 2017 and 2018 in relation to subregions, catchments and river dischargesFigure 2. Summary of evaluation of sites selected for long term monitoringFigure 3. MDS plot of macroalgal communities by site. Symbol/colour combinations distinguish 41 individual sites, eachof which was surveyed in 2017 and 2018. The symbol used to represent each site is shown in1421Appendix A.24abbreviations listed in Appendix A.25Figure 4. MDS plot of macroalgal communities by AMLR subregion. Outliers from subregions are labelled usingFigure 5. Fish species with the highest abundance and biomass from reef surveys in 2017 and 2018.Figure 6. MDS plot of fish communities by site. Symbol/colour combinations distinguish 41 individual sites, each ofwhich was surveyed in 2017 and 2018. The symbol used to represent each site is shown in Appendix26A.27listed in Appendix A.28Figure 7. MDS plot of fish communities by AMLR subregion. Outliers from subregions are labelled using abbreviationsFigure 8. MDS plot of mobile invertebrate communities by site. Symbol/colour combinations distinguish 41 individualsites, each of which was surveyed in 2017 and 2018. The symbol used to represent each site is shownin Appendix A.29abbreviations listed in Appendix A.30Figure 9. MDS plot of mobile invertebrate communities by AMLR subregion. Outliers from subregions are labelled usingFigure 10. Richness of macroalgal functional groups by subregion and yearFigure 11. Richness of macroalgal functional groups by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviation areprovided in Appendix A.Figure 12. Percentage cover of canopy-forming macroalgae by subregion and yearFigure 13. Percentage cover of canopy-forming macroalgae by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviationare provided in Appendix A.Figure 14. Richness of fish species by subregion and yearFigure 15. Richness of fish species by site and year. Note that fish surveys (method 1) were not undertaken at Port ElliotDeep (PED) in 2017. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are provided in Appendix A.Figure 16. Biomass of large ( 20 cm) fish by subregion and yearFigure 17. Biomass of large ( 20 cm) fish by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are provided inAppendix A.Figure 18. Biomass of targeted fish by subregion and yearFigure 19. Biomass of targeted fish by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are provided in AppendixA.Figure 20. Community temperature index for fish by subregion and yearFigure 21. Community temperature index for fish by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are3637383839394040414142provided in Appendix A.43abundance across individual sites.44Figure 22. Mean abundance of blue groper (per block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error of meanFigure 23. Mean abundance of blue groper (per block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of meanabundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviation areprovided in Appendix A.44error of mean abundance across individual sites.45Figure 24. Mean abundance of southern blue devil (per 50 m block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standardDEW Technical report 2020/01iv

Figure 25. Mean abundance of southern blue devil (per 50 m block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error ofmean abundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviationare provided in Appendix A.45mean abundance across individual sites.46Figure 26. Mean abundance of bluethroat wrasse (per block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error ofFigure 27. Mean abundance of bluethroat wrasse (per block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of meanabundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviation areprovided in Appendix A.46abundance across individual sites.47Figure 28. Mean abundance of sea sweep (per block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of meanFigure 29. Mean abundance of sea sweep (per 50 m block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error ofmean abundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviationare provided in Appendix A.Figure 30. Richness of mobile invertebrates by subregion and yearFigure 31. Richness of mobile invertebrates by site and year. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are provided inAppendix A.Figure 32. Density of abalone (per 50 m block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error of mean2abundance across individual sites.Figure 33. Density of abalone (per 50 m block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of mean abundance2across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviation are provided inAppendix A.Figure 34. Density of southern rock lobster (per 50 m2 block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error ofmean abundance across individual sites.Figure 35. Density of southern rock lobster (per 50 m block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of mean2abundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviation areprovided in Appendix A.Figure 36. Density of purple urchin (per 50 m block) by subregion and year. Error bars show standard error of mean2abundance across individual sites.Figure 37. Density of purple urchin (per 50 m block) by site and year. Error bars show standard error of mean2abundance across four contiguous 50 m transects. Site names corresponding to abbreviation areprovided in Appendix A.474849505051515252List of tablesTable 1. Summary of pressures, biological impacts and potential indicators derived by Imgraben et al. (2019)17Table 3. Physical characteristics of reefs surveyed within the AMLR region during 2017 and 2018.23Table 2. Focal species and characteristics for its inclusion to be monitoredTable 4. Mean number of individuals of each FCC prioritised for monitoring (per 200 m transect, methods 1 and 2, both19blocks) across 2017 and 2018 surveys. Pink shaded areas show the priority monitoring sites identifiedby Brock et al. (2017) for all except the four most common species. New sites established for the 2017and 2018 survey are marked with an asterisk (*).Table 5. Mean number of individuals of other (not monitoring priority) species (per 200 m transect, methods 1 and 2,both blocks) across 2017 and 2018 surveys. New sites established for the 2017 and 2018 survey aremarked with an asterisk (*).Table 6. Summary of subregional characteristicsTable 7. Catchment discharge point monitoringDEW Technical report 2020/0132345356v

Table 8. Sites selected to address a range of scenarios related to different monitoring objectives. Note: ADP AdelaideDesalination Plant, MP Marine Parks.Table 9. Invertebrate species group mappingTable 10. Targeted reef speciesDEW Technical report 2020/01587071vi

Executive SummarySubtidal reefs are a major component of the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges (AMLR) Natural ResourcesManagement (NRM) region’s coastal marine ecosystems. They extend from Port Parham in the north of Gulf StVincent to Goolwa in the south of the region. Subtidal reefs in the AMLR NRM region provide habitat, food andshelter for a wide diversity of coastal marine organisms including several iconic species of conservation concern,including the leafy seadragon, southern blue devil and western blue groper. In addition to their importance forbiodiversity conservation, subtidal reefs provide a range of critical ecosystem services, support thriving commercialfishing and tourism businesses, and are valued recreational assets.In recognition of the importance of subtidal reefs and in line with responsibilities under the Natural ResourcesManagement Act 1984, the AMLR NRM Board in partnership with the Department for Environment and Waterestablished the AMLR Subtidal Reef Health (SRH) Program to improve our understanding and management ofthese marine systems. The aims of this program are to develop a consistent and strategic approach to monitoringsubtidal reefs that provides information on the status and health of these systems that is relevant to managementobjectives. To date the AMLR Subtidal Reef Health Program has: established a suite of 41 sites within eightsubregions of the AMLR region for long term monitoring of subtidal reefs (see Figure 1); identified a standardisedapproach to data collection and storage; and developed a framework and associated conceptual models thatunderpin our current understanding of the pressures and functions of these systems (Imgraben et al. 2019).The structure of the SRH program enables management of subtidal reef ecosystems at different spatial scalesincluding broad landscape, as a combination of sub-regions (i.e. Adelaide metro and South metro), or asindependent sub-regions and stand-alone sites to accommodate changes to management boundaries or toanswer specific questions on local scale biodiversity. This includes providing information that can be used toreport on ecological monitoring goals. The SRH is currently the only landscape scale marine program thatcaptures broad spatial information on the influences of coastal and terrestrial processes including catchmentdischarge on nearshore marine habitats. While seagrass habitat condition monitoring is also conducted, it isspatially restricted to the Southern Fleurieu and Port Adelaide coasts. Nonetheless, when combined with SRH,these two programs provide complementary and appropriate spatial coverage for management to assess regionalhealth of nearshore marine habitats and status of species over time.A key component of the SRH program is the engagement of community volunteers in the collection of monitoringdata. Through the international Reef Life Survey (RLS) Program, several volunteer divers have now been trainedand accredited in RLS survey methods which enables them to contribute to the ongoing monitoring of key reeflocations of the program. This approach provides an invaluable social outcome by building capacity andknowledge in the community.This report provides a first summary of the baseline status of subtidal reefs throughout the AMLR region, based onassessments against 10 indicators of reef condition, and documents the associated regional patterns in marinebiodiversity.In 2017 and 2018, standardised reef surveys using the RLS program protocols were conducted at 41 reef sitesgrouped into subregions identified for long term monitoring. The data collected were used to:o establish the baseline status of subtidal reefs in the AMLR Regiono assess the subregional approach taken to partitioning variation in the systemo characterize regional biodiversity patternso evaluate the suitability of the sites selected for monitoringDEW Technical report 2020/01vii

The eight indicators of reef condition were derived from conceptual modelling undertaken as part of the AMLRSRH Program (Imgraben et al. 2019), and were used to assess the baseline condition of subtidal reefs across theDEW Technical report 2020/01viii

study area. The indicators were chosen to reflect the main pressures impacting on reefs and includedinternationally adopted indicators such as the abundance of large reef fish and the Community Temperature Index(CTI, Stuart-Smith et al. 2018). The values for the 10 indicators were calculated for 2017 and 2018. Thisinformation established for the first time a baseline status for AMLR subtidal reefs that is regional, standardised,repeatable and comparable with other temperate reef systems around the world. This baseline will be invaluablefor ongoing monitoring and management of these marine ecosystems.Analysis of the data showed that there were subregional differences in the assemblages of macroalgae, mobileinvertebrates and fish. In general, each subregion was represented by a unique combination of marine organisms.While this is expected, given physical gradients of temperature and wave exposure within the AMLR region, it isnevertheless important to document as there are obvious implications for monitoring and management. Thesubregional approach, which grouped reef sites into eight broad locations (subregions) outlined by Brock et al.(2017), reflects real ecological differences in subtidal biological communities and provides a useful, practical andconceptual framework for long term monitoring and management of these systems.Macroalgal diversity was relatively consistent throughout the region, however canopy cover was much higher insouthern facing subregions reflecting the influence of higher wave energy. Fish species richness was highestalong the Adelaide Metro to Yankalilla subregions, however, different regions were important for different species.For example, nearly all records of blue groper came from south facing subregions while the southern blue devilwas found only at more protected sites with a west facing aspect, particularly Seacliff reef which is a hot spot forthis species in the region. In general, sites found within Marine Park Sanctuary Zones tended to have higherabundance of large fish species reflecting the exclusion of fishing pressure from these areas. Mobile marineinvertebrate communities also showed differences in assemblages across the region. No marine pests wererecorded during the surveys.The collection of data from the 41 monitoring sites offered an opportunity to review the suitability of sites inrelation to management objectives. The original criteria for site selection promoted representation of thesubregions and reef types within them, assessment of catchment impacts and monitoring a subset of species ofconservation concern. Some sites are more suitable than others depending upon the management focus. In lightof this an analytical scenario tool in Excel was developed in this study to rationalise the future selection ofmonitoring sites according to management priorities.It is recommended that ongoing monitoring continues where resources allow. In addition this report makes anumber of recommendations that are summarised here: An analysis of trends in the 10 indicators be undertaken for reef sites where long term data exists as thiswill significantly improve reporting for these ecosystems. The condition of subtidal reefs in most NRM regions is unknown because there are no agreed conditionbenchmarks for statewide reporting. It is recommended that further work be undertaken to investigatehow the results of this program can contribute to establishing agreed benchmarks for condition. Explore options for developing data visualization product to extend the results of this work to all relevantstakeholders including the general public. Identify flagship species not adequately assessed by the current monitoring program If management objectives remain the same the number of sites included for long term monitoring shouldbe rationalised to 36.DEW Technical report 2020/01ix

1 Introduction1.1 Subtidal Rocky ReefsNear-shore subtidal reefs are a major component of the coastal ecosystems of the Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges(AMLR) Natural Resources Management (NRM) region. They extend in patches along the coastline from PortParham in the north of Gulf St Vincent (GSV) to Cape Jervis and across the Fleurieu Peninsula to Goolwa in thesouth (Brock et al. 2017). Subtidal reefs provide valuable coastal protection and are biodiverse, and continue todeliver important ecosystem services providing both breeding habitat for a range of species. Reef systems areculturally significant to Kaurna and Ngarrindjeri across the AMLR region (Telfer and Malone 2012) and support abroad range of industries and recreational activities. These systems are extremely important to the functioning ofthe Gulf St Vincent marine environment and if maintained in a healthy state will help ameliorate the impacts ofclimate change by providing genetic diversity for adaption, coastal protection and resilience to disturbance(Roberts et al. 2017).Subtidal reefs support the growth of canopy forming macroalgae that provide critical habitat for a range of fishand invertebrate species (Teagle et al. 2017). Several species dependent on these reefs (e.g. lobsters, abalone,squid and sweep) support important commercial and recreational fishing industries and their activities, while arange of other species are considered to be of conservation concern including leafy seadragons, southern bluedevils (Baker 2007) and black cowries (Baker 2011). The combination of iconic species and high diversity makethese reefs popular places for recreational snorkeling and scuba diving.Subtidal rocky reefs in the AMLR region typically range in depth from the intertidal zone to more than 20 m andare comprised mainly of limestone, schist or granite formations with profiles that vary from flat platform-likestructures to high relief complexes (Brock et al. 2017). Because of the extent and range of differences among reefsacross the region, any assessments of habitats and species require indicators and methodologies that can accountfor site variation in order to provide adequate and consistent long-term data used to track status and to informecosystem management.1.2 Natural resources management frameworkThe South Australian Government, through the State Natural Resources Management Plan, has responsibilitiesunder the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 (The Act) to provide for monitoring and evaluation of the stateand condition of the natural resources of the state on an ongoing basis.Marine ecosystems are ecologically and socio-economically important for the AMLR region, and near-shore reefsprovide critical habitat for local and regional biodiversity and are significant public amenity assets. The nearshoreproximity of reefs subjects them to extrinsic pressures from the land, e.g. catchment and stormwater discharge,and sedimentation, which can influence long-term condition and resilience.The AMLR NRM Board has a responsibility under the Act to ensure that the Regional NRM Plan developed for theregion includes information about the issues surrounding the management of natural resources at the regionaland local level. More specifically, the NRM Plan must include information about arrangements to ensure propermanagement of wetlands and estuaries, and marine resources, with particular reference to the relationshipsbetween catchment, wetland, estuarine and marine systems.The Regional NRM strategic plan for the region is intended by The Act to apply to all stakeholders managingnatural resources in the AMLR region.DEW Technical report 2020/0110

1.3 Health of Rocky Reefs in the AMLR regionA number of pressures have been identified that impact on rocky reefs and nearshore ecosystem environments inthe AMLR region. Bryars (2013) for example, provided a detailed spatial review of key threats and remediationactions by dividing the AMLR region into 51 coastal and marine cells highlighting sedimentation, pollution, anddischarge from storm water and catchments as contributing factors. Similarly, the GSV bioregional assessment ofnearshore marine ecosystems by the EPA (Nelson et al. 2013) also suggest threats and pressures are spatiallyexplicit but inputs commonly include wastewater discharge, agricultural runoff, storm water and catchmentdischarge carrying sediments, nutrients and pollutants.Most recently, a temperate reef ecosystem workshop using expert elicitation identified that, in addition to climatechange, sedimentation, nutrients and fishing are the major pressures affecting subtidal reefs in the AMLR region(Imgraben 2019). These pressures are often cumulative and can result in reduced ecosystem function and servicesassociated with loss of habitat leading to simplified food webs and reduced biodiversity (Ling et al. 2018).Over the years there have been a number of reef monitoring programs established across the AMLR region(Cheshire & Westphalen 2000, Turner et al. 2006, Brook & Bryars 2014, Westphalen 2015) which have aimed tocharacterise the health or status of reef systems. These studies have contributed to our understanding of thecomposition and changes to algal, fish and invertebrate subtidal reef communities, however, the efforts havemainly been focused on reef systems found adjacent to the Adelaide metropolitan coast with limited studies andknowledge of reef ecosystems outside of the urban Adelaide region. Therefore there is limited consolidatedinformation and spatial understanding of the drivers and natural assets of temperate subtidal reefs across theAMLR region.Currently there is no agreed framework or consistent method for reporting on the status of subtidal reefs (Brook& Bryars 2014, State Environmental Trend and Condition Report Cards 2018). However the approach outlined inBrock et al 2017 has been adopted as the endorsed framework to adequately monitor changes to theseecosystems and manage potential pressures and threats (e.g. sedimentation, pests) and contribute to the broaderstrategic plan for integrated reporting on the health and condition of marine assets (e.g. seagrass and marinepests) in AMLR region.1.4 Subtidal Reef Health ProgramThe AMLR Subtidal Reef Health (SRH) Program, funded by the AMLR NRM Board in partnership with theDepartment for Environment and Water was established to improve our ability to assess the status of subtidalrocky reefs in the AMLR region to inform management of these important assets. The program was established in2016 and is iterative with each successive step built on previous steps. The objectives of the SRH program are to:1.Identify a suite of sites for long term monitoring of the health of subtidal reefs that align with AMLR NRMmanagement objectives and recommend a standard, repeatable and consistent approach to datacollection at these sites.2. Develop conceptual models of how AMLR subtidal reefs function, by identifying knowedge gaps,indicators and the drivers, pressures and threats that affect them.3.Develop community capacity and foster knowledge building through workshops and training events tocontribute to collecting scientific data on reef ecosystems to assist in management4. Collect baseline data on the current status of reefs using a standardized and internationallyrecognised sampling platform and approach5.Document the ecological characteristics of reefs in the AMLR region and establish baseline statusDEW Technical report 2020/0111

6.Define condition and assess trends in reef sites where long term data are available to align with andimprove current reporting frameworks (e.g. State Environmental Trend and Condition Report Cards, stateand national State of the Environment reports)7.Evaluate the SRH program to guide future investmentThe first two objectives of the SRH program have been achieved and are fundamental steps to assist the longerterm objectives. Brock et al. (2017) reviewed previous subtidal reef projects in the AMLR region and identified 41sites across eight spatial subregions that represent the range of water temperature, wave exposure, depths,substrate composition and relief of inshore reefs ( 10m deep). The sites were also chosen to align with certainmanagement objectives such as potential pressures from land based discharge and provision of habitat for arange of regionally significant resident species. The conceptual models report by Imgraben et al. (2019), is the firstreport of its kind to consolidate and characterize the current knowledge of AMLR reefs, highlighting key threats,pressures and outcomes, and the current gaps in knowledge.The models and technical reports herein are testable, and it is envisaged that when new data become available,the models would be updated so that knowledge and management objectives can be improved. Ongoing use ofthe RLS method will ensure that data are collected in a standard and consistent manner.Objective 3 has engaged the broader dive community and is an ongoing process that envisages to increasecommunity awareness, build knowledge and skills through training, and improve efficacy to deliver the reefprogram through the use of certified citizen scientists. This program encourages and provides opportunity forcompetent members of the public to be upskilled and trained using internationally recognised scientific divingmethodology RLS. These skills provide divers with an opportunity outside of the SRH citizen scientist program toextend their involvement in reef health surveys on a global scale. The SRH citizen science program report (Hicks2019) highlights effective engagement, upskill and successful accreditation of divers involved in the program.Objectives 4 and 5 are the subject of the present report.1.5 ObjectivesThe objectives of this project and report were to:1.Collect baseline data for the 41 reefs identified for long term monitoring by Brock et al. (2017)using the RLS as a standardised and internationally recognised sampling approach;2.Document the ecological characteristics of selected subtidal reefs within each of the eight subregions;3.Establish a baseline status using indicators recommended by Brock et al. (2017) and those derivedfrom conceptual models (Imgraben et al. 2019); and4.Using the baseline data, evaluate the appropriateness of the long term monitoring sites for reportingagainst management objectives.DEW Technical report 2020/0112

2 Methods2.1 Baseline data collectionForty-one subtidal reef sites were recommended for long term monitoring of AMLR by Brock et al. (2017). Theaim was to survey all of these reefs in 2017 and 2018 to establish a baseline status and provide data to evaluatethe suitability of these sites to inform management priorities.DEW have established protocols for acquiring field data on reef ecosystems (Brock et al. 2017), based on the RLSmethods (Reef Life Survey 2015).The RLS

DEW Technical report 2020/01 ii Contents Executive Summary vii 1 Introduction 10 1.1 Subtidal Rocky Reefs 10 1.2 Natural resources management framework 10 1.3 Health of Rocky Reefs in the AMLR region 11 1.4 Subtidal Reef Health Program 11 1.5 Objectives 12 2 Methods 13 2.1 Baseline data collecti

Related Documents:

provider specialty, index year (2014-17), baseline anxiety, baseline dyspnea, baseline congestive heart failure, baseline angina pectoris, baseline renal disease, baseline obstructive sleep apnea, baseline pneumonia, age, baseline Elixhauser comorbidity index score, baseline COPD total medical costs, baseline exacerbation episode

Reef Life Survey Assessment of Coral Reef Biodiversity in the Northst Marine Parks Network-we. Citation . Edgar GJ, Mellin C, Turak E, Stuart-Smith RD, Cooper AT, Ceccarelli DM (2020) Reef Life Survey Assessment of Coral Reef Biodiversity in the North-west Marine Parks Network . Reef Life Survey Foundation

3. On the board or another place that will be visible throughout the class, have students brainstorm differences between the different reef classifications (fringing reef, barrier reef, atoll, and patch reef). 4. Hand out Lesson 2: Reef Typing student worksheet. 5. Assign groups of 2-3 students and give each group a copy of Appendix A: Reef .

Estuarine sediment, UK 31 particles kg 1 Thompson et al., 2004 Subtidal sediment, UK 86 particles kg 1 Thompson et al., 2004 Subtidal sediment, Florida 214 particles l 1 Graham and Thompson, 2009 Subtidal sediment, Maine 105 particles l 1 Graham and Thompson, 2009 Harbour sediment, Sweden 50 particles l 1 Norén, 2008

habitat loss and degradation. The present reef area at 13.25 km 2 is much reduced from an estimated 39.85 km 2 in 1953, with decreases in intertidal and subtidal coral reef areas by over 61% and 89% respectively since 1953 (Tun 2012a). Further decline in reef area is expected due to the proposed reclamation to meet land use demands by the

limestone, shale, and sandstone units. The Capitan Reef Complex geologic model of fore-reef, reef, and back-reef facies was described in detail by King (1948) and is illustrated in Figure 3, by Melim and Scholle (1999). The Capitan Reef Complex is exposed in outcrops in the Guadalupe Mountains (Eddy County,

Investing in the Great Barrier Reef The Great Barrier Reef is the world's best managed reef. Only the Coalition Government will keep it that way. We understand not only the importance of protecting the Reef, but of ensuring the Reef economy stays strong and resilient for generations to come.

Advanced Management Accounting CIMA (P2) The best things in life are free To benefit from these notes you must watch the free lectures on the OpenTuition website in which we explain and expand on the topics covered. In addition question practice is vital!! You must obtain a current edition of a Revision / Exam Kit - the CIMA approved publisher is Kaplan. It contains a great number of exam .