Assessing National Biodiversity Trends for Rocky and Coral Reefs through the Integration of Citizen Science and Scientific Monitoring Programs

Abstract

Reporting progress against targets for international biodiversity agreements is hindered by a shortage of suitable biodiversity data. We describe a cost-effective system involving Reef Life Survey citizen scientists in the systematic collection of quantitative data covering multiple phyla that can underpin numerous marine biodiversity indicators at high spatial and temporal resolution. We then summarize the findings of a continental- and decadal-scale State of the Environment assessment for rocky and coral reefs based on indicators of ecosystem state relating to fishing, ocean warming, and invasive species and describing the distribution of threatened species. Fishing impacts are widespread, whereas substantial warming-related change affected some regions between 2005 and 2015. Invasive species are concentrated near harbors in southeastern Australia, and the threatened-species index is highest for the Great Australian Bight and Tasman Sea. Our approach can be applied globally to improve reporting against biodiversity targets and enhance public and policymakers’ understanding of marine biodiversity trends.

Rapid declines across Australian fishery stocks indicate global sustainability targets will not be achieved without an expanded network of ‘no‐fishing’ reserves

“…The total biomass of large fishes ≥20 cm in total length, a key indicator of fishing pressure (Stuart‐Smith et al, ), declined significantly ( P < 0.05) on transects both in limited fishing zones (with a mean decline of 18%) and in reef sites that were open to fishing (with a mean decline of 36%) for the period from 2005 to 2015 (Figure ). No significant overall trend in large fish biomass was apparent across sites in marine reserves (mean 4% rise).…”

“…Underwater visual surveys were conducted by divers along 5 m × 50 m transect blocks through three reef monitoring programmes: the Australian Institute of Marine Science Long Term Monitoring programme (Emslie, Cheal, Sweatman, & Delean, ; 276 sites); the Reef Life Survey (Edgar & Stuart‐Smith, ; 127 sites); and the Australian Temperate Reef Collaboration programme (Edgar & Barrett, ; 119 sites). Data analysed are the same as those integrated for the 2016 Australian State of the Environment Report, and are plotted at the regional level in Figure of Stuart‐Smith et al (), other than that sites surveyed on two or less occasions were excluded. Fish length and abundance estimates were converted to biomass using species‐specific length–weight coefficients obtained from FishBase (http://www.fishbase.org), as applied in previous analyses using Reef Life Survey (RLS) data (Duffy, Lefcheck, Stuart‐Smith, Navarrete, & Edgar, ; Edgar et al, ; Soler et al, ).…”

“…Here, decadal time series were used to estimate the net benefit of marine reserves in enhancing the biomass of large reef fishes, relative to both marine parks with limited fishing permitted and to open‐access waters where normal fisheries regulations apply. We integrate outputs from three broad‐scale reef fish monitoring programmes (Stuart‐Smith et al, ), which together span temperate and tropical waters around Australia.…”

Translating local benthic community structure to national biogenic reef habitat types

“…Both the RLS and LTMPA programmes aim to collect spatially dispersed data nationally and across temperate Australia, respectively. With the Australian Institute of Marine Sciences Great Barrier Reef Long‐Term Monitoring programme, they contribute substantially to Australian State of the Marine Environment Reporting in the marine realm (Stuart‐Smith et al, ).…”

Monitoring of tropical freshwater fish resources for sustainable use

“…Furthermore, when applied to multi‐species fisheries, species identifications are often incorrect and the consistency can be variable, especially if the capacity of the fishers engaged in reporting is limited (Kosmala et al, ; Patricio et al, ; Sverdrup‐Jensen, ; Visser et al, ). A key requirement for ensuring that the data available from fisheries‐dependent monitoring is therefore to ensure check and balances are in place, training is provided to the data collectors and there are independent calibration points available (Cotter & Pilling, ; Stuart‐Smith et al , ). Citizen‐science is considered a cheap way to get a lot of data, but to ensure it is done accurately and effectively, and the information is reliable, often requires costly secondary evaluations (Freitag et al, ).…”