Monitoring by local community managers tightens the adaptive management cycle by linking management more closely with its evaluation, so management actions become more responsive to the field situation. Local community volunteers, usually fishers, managing coral reef protected areas in the Philippines used simple methods (e.g. snorkeling fish visual census) to periodically monitor and evaluate reef protection together with professional marine biologists. Except for estimates of hard coral, data collected by local volunteers were not significantly correlated with data collected by biologists (specifically abundance estimates of sand, major reef fish carnivores, and fish herbivores). Community-collected fish data generally have higher variance and show higher abundances than biologist-collected data. Nonetheless, though the data was less precise, the locally based monitoring identified or confirmed the need for management actions that were generic in nature (e.g. stronger enforcement, organizational strengthening, etc.). The locally based monitoring also encouraged cooperation among stakeholders and prompted a management response. Little time and financing is required after initial establishment and replication has been increasing. However, sustainability depends upon the communities' perceived added-value of undertaking the monitoring and input from a paid and/or more committed local person (e.g. government) who occasionally conducts monitoring himself/herself and supervises the community monitoring. Management impact depends heavily upon good integration with active management interventions outside the monitoring effort per se.

Recovery of corals after full burial with littoral sediment (16% silt, 46% fine sand and 38% coarse sand, 28% CaC03) was monitored in 2 field experiments at the reefs off Lucero, Bolinao (Pangasinan, NW Philippines), from April to May 1996. In the first experiment at 2 m depth, Porites was buried for 0, 6, 20 and 68 h; a second experiment was done at 5 m depth and 4 common taxa (Porites, Galaxea, Heliopora and Acropora) were buried for 20 h. At 2 m depth, Porites was not affected by 6 h burial compared to the controls that were not buried. Increasing burial time had increasingly more serious effects. Burial for 20 h resulted in increased discoloration of the coral tissue. After 68 h of burial, up to 90% of the tissue bleached in the first days. About 50% of this tissue disappeared subsequently and bare coral skeleton became exposed or were covered with algae. After a few weeks, however, recovery took place: the bare areas were recolonized from surrounding surviving tissue or from highly retracted polyps in the affected area. In the corals that had been buried for 20 h no more significant differences from the controls were observed after 3 wk. For those that were buried for 68 h, this was the case after 4 wk. At 5 m depth, all Acropora died after the 20 h burial treatment, but the other taxa recovered In a comparable way to the Porites in the first experiment at 2 m depth. It is concluded that complete burial will cause considerable whole-colony mortality in at least Acropora, and thus may result in a permanent loss of coral taxa from reefs that are subject to such intense sedimentation events. Less sensitive taxa incur substantial damage but significant recovery was observed after a month.

Partial mortality or tissue necrosis was quantified in the massive scleractinian coral Porites at three sites in The Philippines (Bolinao, NW Luzon; Puerto Galera, Mindoro; and El Nido, N Palawan). Overall, 15 ± 1 (mean ± 1 standard error, 642 replicates) percent of colony area was dead, mean colony area was 1135 ± 127 cm 2 , and lesion density was 1.7 ± 0.1 dm-2. Total live coral cover varied between 20 and 63 % in belt transects, and Porites and Acropora cover were inversely correlated. ANOVA models incorporating effects of site, colony size, sedimentation rates, wave exposure and depth were highly significant but explained only a small proportion of the variation observed in lesion density and percent dead area (respectively 8 and 2 %). Lesion density was found to vary significantly with site (contributed 29% to this explained variance), decrease with increasing colony area (33%), and increase with increasing sedimentation (23 %) and wave exposure (14 %). Colony size was significantly explained by the factor site (contributing 61 % to the total 29 % explained variance) and depth (34 %), with the smallest colonies being observed in Bolinao and the largest in El Nido. Densities of lesions were highest in Bolinao, intermediate in Puerto Galera, and lowest in El Nido. This pattern is parallel to intensity of human reef exploitation and opposite to that in colony size, live coral cover and Acropora cover. Since only a small part of the observed variance in partial mortality estimators was explained by the ANOVAs, other factors not quantified here must have been more important (e.g. disease incidence, predation, human exploitation).

No abstract