Pez Maya April-June 2011 Quaterly Report

8/3/2019 Pez Maya April-June 2011 Quaterly Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pez-maya-april-june-2011-quaterly-report 1/44

Global Vision International2011 Report Series No. 002

GVI Mexico

Pez Maya Marine Expedition

Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve

Quarterly Report 112

April- June 2011



GVI Mexico, Pez Maya Expedition Report 112

Submitted in whole toGVI

Amigo de Sian Ka’anComisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas (CONANP)

Produced byVicki Bush - Base Manager

Martin Stelfox - Science and Dive Officer Sarah Davies - Science Officer

Esther Hantman - Scholar

And

Arjun Dutta Volunteer Kristiane Dranger Volunteer Douglas Coughran Volunteer Diana Geppert Volunteer

Sarah James Volunteer Rebecca Stroud Volunteer Jack Williamson Volunteer Alex Sullivan Volunteer

Nick Walding Volunteer Alexander Scott Volunteer Simon Lewis Volunteer Enrique Perez Garcin NSP

Jennifer Simpson Volunteer Thomas Nuttall-Smith Scholar Susannah Gibson Volunteer Mark Cowking Scholar

Edited by

Sarah Davies

Lluvia Soto

GVI Mexico, Pez Maya

Email: [email protected] Web page: http://www.gvi.co.uk and http://www.gviusa.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.gvi.co.uk/



http://www.gviusa.com/

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.gviusa.com/



Executive Summary

The 32nd ten week phase of the Pez Maya, Mexico, GVI expedition has now been

completed. The programme has maintained working relationships with local communitiesthrough both English classes and local community events. The programme has continued

to work towards the gathering of important environmental scientific data whilst working

with local, national and international partners. The following projects have been run during

Phase 112:

• Monitoring of strategic sites along the coast.

• Training of volunteers in the MBRS methodology including fish, hard coral, and

algae identification.• Continuing the MBRS Synoptic Monitoring Programme (SMP) for the selected sites

within the northern Sian Ka’an Biosphere to provide regional decision makers with

up to date information on the ecological condition of the reef.

• Providing English lessons and environmental education opportunities for the local

community.

• Further developing of the recycling Project “Punta Allen Verde”.

• Continuation of the Mayan Farm Project, Nuevo Durango Organic farm, assisting a

local Mayan community to establish and develop a composting programme.

• Liaising with local partners to develop a successful and feasible programme of

research in collaboration with GVI into the future.

• Continue adding to a coral and fish species list that will expand over time as a

comprehensive guide for the region.

• Continuation of weekly beach cleans within the reserve, monitoring waste

composition and trends.

• Daily bird monitoring and Incidental sightings program.

• Marine Turtle Monitoring Programme along the Pez Maya beach.

• Continuation of the National Scholarship Programme, whereby GVI Pez Maya

accepts a Mexican national on a scholarship basis into the expedition.

© GVI – 2010 ii



Table of Contents

Executive Summary...........................................................................................................iiList of Figures...................................................................................................................ivList of Tables....................................................................................................................iv

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................5

2. Synoptic Monitoring Programme...................................................................................62.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................6

2.2 Aims....................................................................................................................8

2.3 Methodology.......................................................................................................82.4 Results...............................................................................................................10

2.5 Discussion.........................................................................................................14

3. Community programme...............................................................................................16

3.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................163.2 Aims..................................................................................................................16

3.3 Activities and Achievements............................................................................16

3.4 Review..............................................................................................................174. Incidental Sightings.....................................................................................................19

4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................19

4.2 Aims..................................................................................................................194.3 Methodology.....................................................................................................19

4.4 Results...............................................................................................................20

4.5 Discussion.........................................................................................................215. Marine Litter Monitoring Programme.........................................................................24

5.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................24

5.2 Aims..................................................................................................................24

5.3 Methodology.....................................................................................................245.4 Results...............................................................................................................25

5.5 Discussion.........................................................................................................26

6. Bird Monitoring Programme........................................................................................276.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................27

6.2 Aims..................................................................................................................27

6.3 Methodology.....................................................................................................286.4 Results...............................................................................................................28

6.5 Discussion.........................................................................................................31

7. References....................................................................................................................32

8. Appendices...................................................................................................................34Appendix I – SMP Methodology Outlines.............................................................34

Appendix II - Adult Fish Indicator Species List.....................................................38

Appendix III - Juvenile Fish Indicator Species List...............................................39Appendix IV - Coral Species List...........................................................................40

Appendix V - Fish Species List..............................................................................41

Appendix VI - Bird Species List.............................................................................43

iii



List of Figures

Figure 2-3-1 The monitoring sites of Pez Maya (Courtesy of JuniperGIS)

Figure 2-4-1 Percentage of diseased colonies presenting different diseases, across all sites

Figure 2-4-2 Percentage of bleaching events in affected corals

Figure 2-4-3 Breakdown of percentage coverage over all sites.

Figure 2-4-4 Breakdown of macroalgae composition across all sites (%).

Figure 2-4-5 Total number of individuals recorded within each family for each monitoring site

Figure 5-4-1 Breakdown of marine litter collected during phase 112 (Kg)

Figure 6-4-1 Total composition of birds sighted in phase 112 (“Other” refers to species presenting a

percentage of 1% or less).

Figure 6-4-2 The most commonly recorded species (more than 50) in the second quarter of 2011

(phase 112) compared to 2010 (phase 102)

Figure 6-4-3 Bird sightings by status

List of Tables

Table 2-3-1 GPS locations of the monitoring sites. GPS points are listed here in the WGS84 datum.

Table 2-4-1 Total number of individuals recorded for each monitoring site and the average number

of individuals recorded per transect for adult and juvenile fish

Table 4-4-1 Number of sightings for each category

iv



1. Introduction

The Yucatan Peninsula is fringed by the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System (MBRS), the

second largest barrier reef system in the world, extending over 4 countries. Starting from

Isla Contoy at the North of the Yucatan Peninsula it stretches down the Eastern coast of

Mexico down to Belize via Honduras and Guatemala.

The GVI Marine Programme was initiated within Mexico with the setup of its first base, Pez

Maya, in the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve in 2003. Since then the programme has

flourished, with a sister site being set up in the south of Quintana Roo at Punta Gruesa.

Both projects assist our partners, Amigos de Sian Ka’an (ASK) and Comisión Nacional de

Áreas Naturales Protegidas (CONANP) in obtaining baseline data along the coast of

Quintana Roo through marine surveys. This data allows ASK to focus on the areas

needing immediate environmental regulation depending on susceptibility and therefore,

implement management protection plans as and when required.

With the continuing development of the Riviera Maya, effective monitoring is becoming

ever-more important. Inadvertent environmental degradation can be prevented if the

appropriate measures are taken to advocate long-term, sustainable ecotourism. Continual

assessment of Sian Ka’an’s reef health can support and develop management strategies

for the area, the work outlined in this report forming a key part of that assessment.

Methodologies continue to be improved and focused as experience is gained and

improvement to data quality is continuous. A full Annual Report will collate and summarize

all data and enable more descriptive and accurate analysis.

The following research/monitoring programmes have been carried out this phase:

• The MBRS Synoptic Monitoring Programme

• Community Work Programme

• Incidental Sightings

• Marine Littering Monitoring Programme

• Bird Monitoring Programme

© GVI – 2010 Page 5



2. Synoptic Monitoring Programme

2.1 Introduction

The Synoptic Monitoring Programme looks to evaluate the overall health of the reef by

looking at three main areas: Benthic cover, fish populations and physical parameters.

Benthic Cover

Caribbean reefs were once dominated by hard coral, with huge Acropora palmata stands

on the reef crests and Acropora cervicornis and Montastraea annularis dominating the fore

reef. Today, many reefs in the Caribbean have been overrun by macro algae during a

phase shift which is thought to have been brought about by numerous factors including a

decrease in herbivory from fishing and other pressures, eutrophication from land-based

activities and disease (McClanahan & Muthiga, 1998).

Benthic transects record the abundance of all benthic species as well as looking at coral

health. The presence of corals on the reef is in itself an indicator of health, not only

because of the reefs’ current state, but also for its importance to fish populations (Spalding

& Jarvis, 2002). Coral health is not only impacted by increased nutrients and algal growth,

but by other factors, both naturally occurring and anthropogenically introduced. A report

produced by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring

Centre (UNEP-WCMC) in 2004 stated that nearly 66% of Caribbean reefs are at risk from

anthropogenic activities, with over 40% of reefs at high to very high risk (UNEP-WCMC,

2006).

Through monitoring the abundances of hard corals, algae and various other key benthic

species, as well as numbers of Diadema urchin encountered, we aim to determine not only

the current health of the local reefs but also to track any shifts in phase state over time.

Fish Populations

Fish surveys are focused on specific species that play an important role in the ecology of

the reef as herbivores, carnivores, commercially important fish or those likely to be

affected by human activities (AGRRA, 2000).

© GVI – 2010 Page 6



For more in depth rationale of the importance of each of the key fish families please see

previous GVI Pez Maya reports.

All reef fish play an important role in maintaining the health and balance of a reef community. Fishing typically removes larger predatory fish from the reef, which not only

alters the size structure of the reef fish communities, but with the reduction in predation

pressure, the abundance of fish further down the food chain is now determined through

competition for resources (AGRRA, 2000).

Although each fish is important, the removal of herbivores can have a considerable impact

on the health of the reef, particularly in an algal dominated state, which without their

presence has little chance of returning to coral dominance. Through the monitoring of these fish and by estimating their size, the current condition of the reef at each site can be

assessed, any trends or changes can be tracked and improvements or deteriorations

determined.

The monitoring of juvenile fish concentrates on a few specific species. The presence and

number of larvae at different sites can be used as an indication of potential future

population size and diversity. Due to the extensive distribution of larvae, however,

numbers cannot be used to determine the spawning potential of a specific reef. Theremoval of fish from a population as a result of fishing, however, may influence spawning

potential and affect larval recruitment on far away reefs. The removal of juvenile predators

through fishing may also alter the number of recruits surviving to spawn themselves

(AGRRA, 2000).

Together with the information collected about adult fish a balanced picture of the reef fish

communities at different sites can be obtained.

Physical Parameters

For the optimum health and growth of coral communities certain factors need to remain

relatively stable. Measurements of turbidity, water temperature, salinity, cloud cover, and

sea state are taken during survey dives. Temperature increases or decreases can

negatively influence coral health and survival. As different species have different optimum

© GVI – 2010 Page 7



temperature ranges, changes can also influence species richness. Corals also require

clear waters to allow for optimal photosynthesis. The turbidity of the water can be

influenced by weather, storms or high winds stirring up the sediment, or anthropogenic

activities such as deforestation and coastal construction. Increased turbidity reduces light

levels and can result in stress to the coral. Any increase in coral stress levels can result inthem becoming susceptible to disease or result in a bleaching event.

In the near future, GVI Pez Maya hopes to be able to use this data for analysis of temporal

and seasonal changes and try to correlate any coral health issues with sudden or

prolonged irregularities within these physical parameters.

2.2 Aims

The projects at Pez Maya and Punta Gruesa aim to identify coral and fish species with along term, continuous dataset allowing changes in the ecosystem to be identified. The

projects also aim to ascertain areas of high species diversity and abundance. The data is

then supplied to the project partners who can use the data to support management plans

for the area.

2.3 Methodology

The methods employed for the underwater visual census work are those outlined in the

MBRS manual (Almada-Villela et al., 2003), but to summarize, GVI use three separate

methods for buddy pairs:

Buddy method 1: Surveys of corals, algae and other sessile organisms

Buddy method 2: Belt transect counts for coral reef fish

Buddy Method 3: Coral Rover and Fish Rover diver

The separate buddy pair systems are outlined in detail in Appendix I.

The 9 sites that are monitored as part of the MBRS programme at GVI Pez Maya,

replicates a similar study conducted over 15 years ago (Padilla et al. 1992), concentrating

monitoring efforts on the reefs in the northern area of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere (See

Figure 2-3-1 below.

© GVI – 2010 Page 8



These sites have 21 stations in total and are monitored every 3 months to give a long term

evaluation of the reef health.

Figure 2-3-1 The monitoring sites of Pez Maya (Courtesy of JuniperGIS)

© GVI – 2010 Page 9



Location Site ID Depth (m) Latitude LongitudePaso

CampechenPC05 6.3 20.10035º N 087.46380º WPC10 10 20.09945º N 087.46245º W

Pedro Paila PP05 4.9 20.03995º N 087.46965º W

PP10 10.3 20.03753º N 087.46615º WPunta SanJuan

PSJ05 4.7 19.88328º N 087.42607º WPSJ10 10.9 19.88317º N 087.41752º WPSJ20 21.1 19.88048º N 087.41197º W

Punta Yuyum PY20 18.9 19.97288º N 087.45280º WSan Miguel

de RuizSMDR05 2 19.96697º N 087.46080º WSMDR10 9.1 19.96670º N 087.45312º WSMDR20 19.1 19.96825º N 087.45165º W

Table 2-3-1 GPS locations of the monitoring sites. GPS points are listed here in the WGS84 datum.

The sites have a wide range of types of reef including spur and groove formations.

2.4 Results

Four monitoring sites were successfully completed during phase 112; the 10 metre depth

site at Pedro Paila, 20 metre depth site at Punta Yuyum and both 10 and 20 metre depth

sites at San Miguel de Ruiz. The shallower 5 metre depth sites were unable to be

completed due to bad weather.

Benthic Data

A total of 228 coral colonies were recorded for coral community studies sighting 21individual cases of disease (9.2%). Dark spot disease was the most prevalent, accounting

for 86% of the disease sightings. Siderastrea siderea made up 57% of recorded dark spot

cases. Other diseases recorded included Red band disease and White plague (Figure 2-4-

1). There were no recorded cases of Neoplasm, Hyperplasms, Patchy necrosis and Yellow

blotch.

© GVI – 2010 Page 10



Figure 2-4-1 Percentage of diseased colonies presenting different diseases, across all sites.

Different levels of bleaching were recorded on 21.5% of all corals recorded. Pale bleaching

appeared to be most prevalent accounting for 93% of all bleaching events, 73% of pale

bleaching appeared on Siderastrea siderea colonies. In addition Siderastrea siderea was

the only coral recorded as totally bleached (Figure 2-4-2). Eighteen per cent of all corals

recorded were affected by predation. Sponges accounted for 95%. Agracia agracities

appeared most affected by this predation accounting for 26% of all cases seen. Other

predation recorded included coral snail and fireworms.

Figure 2-4-2 Percentage of bleaching events in affected corals

© GVI – 2010 Page 11



The point intercept data showed a 6.8% hermatypic coral cover across all sites, whilst

macroalgae remains considerably higher at 73% coverage. The remaining 20.2%

consisted of smaller reef creatures including Zooanthids, sponges, tunicates, bryzoan and

gorgonians. (Figure 2-4-3).

Figure 2-4-3 Breakdown of percentage coverage over all sites.

Macroalgae was further broken down into sub-categories; brown and green fleshy algae

made up 30% of the total makeup of reef macroalgae, and 25% consisted of turf algae

(other). Coralline algae consisted of 11%, the majority of which (77%) was found at theshallower 10 m sites. This is also where 68% of coral colonies were recorded (Figure 2-4-

4).

Figure 2-4-4 Breakdown of macroalgae composition across all sites (%).

© GVI – 2010 Page 12



Fish Populations

153 adult target fish and 107 juvenile fish were recorded over 32 transects. The average

number of fish recorded per transect was highest at SMDR10 (Figure 2-4-3) and SMDR10

also showed the highest diversity. The most commonly record families were Haemulidae

(Grunts) and Acanthuridae (Surgeonfish), making up 35% and 30% of the total number of

adult fish recorded respectively.

0

5

10

15

20

25

A c a n t h u

r i d a e

B a l i s t

i d a e

C a r a n

g i d a e

C h a e t o d o n t i d a

e

H a e m

u l i d a e

L a b r i d a e

L u t j a n i d

a e

M o n a c a n t h

i d a e

P o m a

c a n t h

i d a e

P o m a

c e n t r

i d a e

S c a r i d a e

S e r r a

n i d a e

PP10

PY20

SMDR10

SMDR20

Figure 2-4-5. Total number of individuals recorded within each family for each monitoring site

Table 2-4-1. Total number of individuals recorded for each monitoring site and the average number of

individuals recorded per transect for adult and juvenile fish

PP10 PY20 SMDR10 SMDR20

Total number of adult individuals 35 34 50 34

Average number of adult fish per transect 4.37 4.25 6.25 4.25

Total number of juvenile individuals 25 29 29 24

Average number of juveniles per transect 3.13 3.63 3.63 3

The 107 juvenile fish recorded covered seven families. The most commonly recorded

juvenile family was Labridae (45% of all families recorded), with the three most common

© GVI – 2010 Page 13



species recorded being; Halichoeres garnoti (Yellowhead Wrasse), Thalassoma

bifasciatum (Bluehead Wrasse) and Stegastes partitus (Bicolour Damselfish) respectively.

2.5 Discussion

Due to a recent phase shift to an algae dominant reef, hermatypic coral cover remains lowat 6.8 %. The average percentage coral cover across the Caribbean is approximately 16%

(Schutte et al ., 2010). The difference in percentage cover at Pez Maya could be due to the

increased development near our local monitoring sites. Also we only four sites were

monitored this phase which would not give a true average representation of the monitoring

sites. Brown and green fleshy algae appeared to be the most abundant which could be

explained by its fast growth rate.

Siderastrea siderea was recorded as the most abundant coral this phase – this speciestends to be particularly susceptible to bleaching, which explains the high percentage of

pale bleached corals recorded, as the majority of those observed with bleaching were S.

siderea. Its susceptibility to bleaching could be a result of the clade of zooxanthellae

housed by the coral. Coral bleaching can occur through an increase in water temperature,

which causes the zooxanthellae to die and be expelled by the coral. When this happens,

the coral can no longer photosynthesise, the flesh loses its colour which is usually created

by the zooxanthellae, and the colony becomes “bleached”. Zooxanthellae are

dinoflagellates of the genus Symbiodinium, of which there are several clades, or groups.Sampayo et al. (2008) found that each clade has fine-scale differences, which allows

some to be more thermally tolerant than others. Some coral species can harbour more

than one clade, whereas others may be restricted to only one.

Agaricia agaricites was the second most commonly recorded coral. This coral grows in

several different forms: carinata (grows in thick, bifacial plates with upright projections);

purpurea (grows in flat plates, ridges are sharp and tall with long, continuous valleys

running parallel to each other); form danai (grows in thick, bifacial blades) and agaricites(has the ability to encrust, displays discontinuous ridges and valleys) (Humann &

DeLoach, 2008). It is therefore expected that this species was recorded as one of the most

common, as it is able to inhabit a wider range of areas than most other corals.

© GVI – 2010 Page 14



Dark spot disease was the most prevalent disease recorded this phase. Dark spot disease

was most frequently seen on Siderastrea siderea – a coral which is particularly susceptible

to this disease. Siderastrea siderea was also the species observed with the most

bleaching – therefore this result is unsurprising, as bleaching causes great stress to a

coral and the colony can become much more vulnerable to diseases (Humann & DeLoach,2008). Sponges were the most prevalent predator on corals this phase; most likely due to

the availability of space for sponges to predate.

Acanthuridae was once again a dominant fish family recorded this phase. Acanthuridae

are an important grazer on the reefs, keeping down algae levels allowing space for new

coral recruits to attach and grow. Within shallow reef areas it is not uncommon to observe

large mixed aggregations of A. coeruleus (Blue Tang), A.bahianus (Ocean Surgeonfish)

and A.chirurgus (Doctorfish) grazing on the algae abundant on these reefs (Deloach, N.1999). Haemulidae were seen to be the dominant family on SMDR10. Haemulidae have

been known to show the largest biomass in areas that have large expanses of seagrass

bed or sand flats (Humann & DeLoach 2008b) feeding on the crustaceans and

invertebrates which are known to forage in these areas. The surrounding area of SMDR10

would be perfect for this with spur and grove reef surrounded by sandy areas and

seagrass beds boarding the shallower areas.

After the high number of juvenile fish recorded last year the average number recorded per transect for this phase was lower. The target juvenile fish species were common on the

reef although the majority were too large to be counted indicating that these are the

individuals monitored during pervious phases. The later phases of this year will show

whether the recruitment on the reefs will continue to show the promising results of

increased numbers seen during 2010. It is also an encouraging sign to see more juveniles

on the reefs as over the last year the number of Lionfish sighted on the reef has been

increasing with each phase. Lionfish are known to target juvenile fish and have a dramatic

effect on the recruitment of the reef (Morris, J. et al. 2009). When Lionfish have beencaught at Pez Maya their stomach are dissected and the most commonly seen fish are

juvenile wrasse species. Future studies will enable us to find out if the increase in lionfish

sightings has an effect on the recruitment of the reefs.

© GVI – 2010 Page 15



3. Community programme

3.1 Introduction

GVI is committed to working with the local communities, assisting them to guide their

development towards a sustainable future. For that, we center our activities in two main

aspects: English and Environmental Education.

GVI hopes to provide the local community with the tools to develop the area beneficially for

themselves, their professions and needs, whilst protecting it for the future. Consequently,

during both the child and adult education programs, wherever possible an environmental

theme has been included within the structure of the lessons.

3.2 Aims

The aims of the community programme in Pez Maya are:

1. To raise awareness about the importance of the ecosystems that surround their

area, providing them with information about it and organizing activities to reinforce

the knowledge given.

2. To provide locals with English lessons that will help them to develop a skill that is

necessary for them in order to be able to communicate with the growing tourist

visitors that come to the area.

3. To participate in the different activities that are organized by the locals and provide

help if it is needed.

3.3 Activities and Achievements

Nuevo Durango

Due to the soil composition, amount of rocks and lack of nutrients found within the thin soil

of the Yucatán Peninsula, growing crops can be a challenging business. During the weekly

visits to Nuevo Durango, staff and volunteers work on farms collecting soil and cutting

vegetation, in preparation for setting up a compost pit; each week a different family ishelped. The compost produced is used by local families to grow a range of organic crops

that can be sold locally. In order to expose volunteers to the way of life in Nuevo Durango,

each week, the host family prepares lunch for the volunteers, allowing the group to

exchange experiences and learn about each other’s life and culture.

© GVI – 2010 Page 16



Pez Maya also supports the Mayan farmers by purchasing some of the weekly fruit and

vegetable supply from the host families.

Punta Allen

Volunteers visit the village once a week during the phase. English lessons for children arecarried out during school hours to ensure the maximum number of children benefit from

the curricula. Three different educational levels are targeted: Kinder garden, Primary and

Secondary school. Volunteers are in charge of preparing lesson plans, including English

language topics and fun activities, such as games, song and painting. Often an

environmental theme is included in the lessons.

Pez Maya also started a recycling project “Punta Allen Verde” in April 2010. The project

has several objectives: to create a solid waste separation programme, to encouragepeople to participate and separate household solid waste with which a proportion of the

profits will support financially the recycling centre, and to establish Punta Allen as an

exemplary community for the region.

Following the delivery of the classes, volunteers participate in a range of activities at the

recycling centre, for example plastic collection around town, tidying up the centre, making

containers for the recycling. The activities vary depending on what have the people in the

village needing doing.

3.4 Review

Punta Allen

As the deterioration of the road had not improved, travel to Punta Allen each week was

again too difficult. However, as it was the first anniversary of the PAVER project, travel

was arranged via a different route into the reserve. All of the volunteers and five staff from

Pez Maya and two from the regional office stayed in Punta Allen to help organize the twoday event. It started early to keep out of the heat of the sun and all the children from the

local secondary and primary schools with the help of GVI volunteers helped to collect and

sort the rubbish. So much rubbish was collected from the road clean that it managed to fill

a whole truck that the government sent down from Tulum. After which everyone headed

down to the recycling centre to help crush a gigantic pile of plastic bottles and make new

© GVI – 2010 Page 17



recycling bins to be placed around the town. Two of the girls from the primary school put

their artistic skills to use helping one of our volunteers to paint a big sign for above the

entrance.

Ana Mancera, who works at Sian Ka’an Ecological Centre ran some handcraft sessions

where the children and many of the adults and volunteers learned how to make fish out of

old newspapers and photo frames from old cardboard boxes and leaves collected from

nearby. There were some very beautiful things made, and also some very messy children

and adults, covered in glue and bits of paper. Jaen Nieto Amat from Amigos de Sian Ka’an

came and gave a talk about environmental awareness and recycling which was followed

by a documentary about the oceans.

Pez Maya’s volunteers put together a play which involved one of the volunteers flying in asa superhero to save the environment and teach the people about how to reduce, reuse

and recycle their waste materials. With a lot of slapstick comedy and silly dressing up

everyone was talking about it for the rest of the day.

Nuevo Durango

This quarter instead of working with a different family each week, one family was worked

with for a number of weeks. This allowed for larger projects as more time could be spent to

complete them. Volunteers worked with three families over seven weeks helping tocompost, building growing areas and helping to plant the crops. Staff and volunteers were

also able to learn more about the processes of composting and some of the natural

remedies of the plants that grow naturally in the region.

© GVI – 2010 Page 18



4. Incidental Sightings

4.1 Introduction

GVI Pez Maya has implemented an incidental sightings program since 2003. This species

are good indicators of reef health and provide early warnings of changes, therefore it is

useful to continue keeping long-term records of which species are around. Species that

make up the incidental sightings list are:

• Sharks

• Rays

• Eels

• Turtles

• Marine Mammals

• Lionfish

• Snakes and crocodiles

• Terrestrial mammals

These groups are identified to species level where possible and added to the data

collected by the Ocean Biogeographic Information Systems Spatial Ecological Analysis of Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS-SEAMAP) database. An interactive online archive for

marine mammal, seabird and turtle data, OBIS-SEAMAP aims to improve understanding

of the distribution and ecology of marine mega fauna by quantifying global patterns of

biodiversity, undertaking comparative studies, and monitoring the status of and impacts on

threatened species.

4.2 Aims

The aim of the project is to record all mega fauna sightings in the vicinity of Pez Maya and

to keep track of the population numbers and spread of lionfish.

4.3 Methodology

Each time an incidental sighting species is seen on a dive, snorkel or around Pez Maya

base it is identified, and the date, time, location, depth it was seen at, and size are all

© GVI – 2010 Page 19



recorded. The volunteers are provided with a Mega fauna presentation during science

training, which aids in identification of shark, ray and turtle species.

For the first time in 093 GVI Pez Maya began recording lionfish sightings. Over the past

decade the Pacific Lionfish (Pterois volitans) has established itself along the Atlantic coastas a result of multiple releases (intentional or otherwise) from private aquaria. This

invasive species lacking in natural predators, has adapted well to the warm waters of the

Caribbean, and is currently spreading its geographical range along the Mesoamerican

coastline.

4.4 Results

During phase 112 a total of 149 incidental sightings were recorded, 70 of these being

lionfish sightings.

Table 4-4-1. Number of sightings for each category.

Category Total Number of Sightings

Lionfish 70

Turtles 30

Rays 18

Marine Mammals 12Snakes and Crocodiles 8

Eels 6

Sharks 5

A total of 30 turtle sightings were recorded; an increase from the 16 that were recorded

during the previous 3 months. A total of 3 different turtle species were recorded; the Greenturtle, the Hawksbill turtle and the Loggerhead turtle. The fourth species that can be found

in the area, the Leatherback, is categorised as critically endangered by the IUCN, and has

not been recorded since monitoring began. Within the total of 30 individuals, 10 were

Green, 1 was Hawksbill, 15 were a Loggerhead and 4 were unidentified individuals.

© GVI – 2010 Page 20



The number of eel sightings has decreased since the previous 3 month total; with 6

sightings compared to 22. This was also the case for ray sightings; only 18 sighted

compared to 61 previously. There are several species of ray that are monitored; the

Caribbean Stingray, Giant Manta Ray, Lesser Electric Ray, Southern Stingray, Spotted

Eagle Ray and Yellow Stingray. The Southern Stingray was the most commonly sighted of the rays with a total of 14 sightings; this seems to be the case for every phase. When

broken down into species, of the 5 sharks sighted, 3 were Nurse sharks and 2 were Bull

sharks. The other species that have been sighted previously (Blacktip, Reef shark and

Hammerhead) were not seen during phase 112.

Of the marine mammals sighted, unidentified dolphins accounted for the majority; with a

total of 10 sighted, the other 2 were Bottlenose dolphins. Manatees follow the trend of low

numbers of sightings since 2007 with none recorded.

Phase 112 saw low numbers in recorded sightings of snakes and crocodiles; 4 crocodile

and 4 snake sightings. Since phase 2010, sightings of snakes and crocodiles have been

steadily increasing with the majority being snake sightings; however the data from this

phase does not seem to follow this pattern.

Since the lionfish monitoring started there has been a dramatic increase in sightings. This

phase, however, we recorded 70 individual sightings; almost half that of the 138 sighted inthe previous 3 month phase.

4.5 Discussion

Incidental sightings of large marine creatures are often good indicators of how healthy an

ecosystem is. As can be seen from the data, the number of sightings and species

recorded varies from phase to phase, with few obvious trends. These species are highly

mobile animals and therefore their movements depend on a range of external factors.

Phase 101 (January-March 2010) had the greatest total number of recorded incidentalsightings since the implementation of the programme. However, variation in recorded

numbers could be a reflection of the amount of diving that occurred. Over the past two

years there has been a steady increase in the number of sightings, suggesting an increase

in reef health. In 073 (July-September 2007), Hurricane Dean hit the coast of Mexico and

greatly affected the reef and animals that live in and around it. The number of incidental

© GVI – 2010 Page 21



sightings recorded during and since phase 101 shows a return to similar numbers before

the hurricane hit, suggesting some reef recovery.

Turtles were one of the most recorded species with a total of 30 individual sightings, this

follows a predictable pattern. Nesting season for all turtle species found on the Yucatanruns between May and September which coincides with the second and third phases of

each year. Phase 112 is during the start of the season and subsequently would show

increased numbers of turtle sightings. This pattern is encouraging and shows a relatively

stable population of turtle species in Pez Maya’s region.

There appears to be a general trend over previous phases of rays being one of the most

commonly sighted species. This is again true and could be for a number of reasons; rays

tend to lay stationary on sandy bottoms in open water and would therefore be more easilyspotted. They are also frequently seen close to the shore whilst observers are swimming

or snorkeling and this too could explain the slightly higher numbers recorded. Since the

project began, there is a clear trend that sightings of Southern stingrays are slowly on the

rise, a thriving species could be the reason for incline, however this doesn’t appear to be a

seasonal trend and could simply be improvements in what is now a well-established

incidental sightings program.

The lower numbers of eel and shark sightings could be due to the lifestyle of the species.Eels hide in rocky crevices away from passing predators or prey and are therefore more

difficult to spot. Sharks are generally mobile and pelagic, and sightings would

subsequently not be as common. This is with the exception of the nurse shark however,

which is always the most commonly sighted shark species. Nurse sharks are reef dwellers

and are able to remain in one place without having to move to breathe; therefore they are

most likely to be spotted on Pez Maya sites. On occasions sharks have also been

observed early in the morning in the shallows off the beach; however exact numbers and

species can often be mistaken as only the fin is seen.

The majority of mammals seen were unidentified dolphins, with the exception of two

Bottlenose dolphins. Mammals are difficult to monitor as they generally inhabit deeper

pelagic waters. In addition dolphins are mostly observed from the surface by boat,

therefore exact numbers and species can be difficult to determine. Manatees generally

© GVI – 2010 Page 22



prefer the calmer waters of the mangrove lagoons than the ocean, which could explain the

low numbers spotted every phase.

As in the previous three month phase, there were lower numbers of sightings of snakes

and crocodiles. Sightings have been steadily increasing over the past year with themajority being snake sightings. Mangroves are the likely place to encounter crocodiles

which involves a walk to the bridge early morning or early evening. This would suggest

that in previous phases more people are actively seeking to look for crocodiles, and results

would therefore depend on the volunteers we have on base. Snakes are cold-blooded and

tend to hibernate during the winter months, this could also indicate why the number of

sightings was lower. It could be thought that some categories or species (e.g. snakes and

land mammals) may be under-represented, as observers tend to concentrate on known

target species and forget to record other species.

The number of lionfish sightings was much lower than expected. Over the past year the

number of lionfish observed around Pez Maya dive sites has been increasing dramatically,

however this phase saw a drop in numbers seen from 138 previously to 70, almost half.

This could be due to the lower number of volunteers that were on base during the phase,

so not as many were being spotted as usual. Or maybe the fact that we have been

regularly killing/removing lionfish ourselves has meant that the overall population has

decreased. It will be interesting to see the data from 113 as this could give a better idea of whether the population of lionfish in the area has been impacted. Either way, regular catch

and removal of this species is vital to reduce the increasing numbers.

This phase the number of incidental sightings was lower than usual, this is most likely due

to the much lower number of volunteers on base, therefore not as many ‘eyes’ to have

observed incidental species. However, on average, sightings are increasing every phase,

which not only indicates an improvement in the quality of data collection and recording, but

is also a good indicator of reef health in the area.

© GVI – 2010 Page 23



5. Marine Litter Monitoring Programme.

5.1 Introduction

Pez Maya’s location on the Yucatan Peninsula means that it faces the Caribbean Current.This is a circular current that combined with the Loop current and the Yucatan current,

transports a significant amount of water northwest ward through the Caribbean Sea. The

main source is from the equatorial Atlantic Ocean via the North Equatorial, North Brazil

and Guiana Currents. Due to the volume of water that is transported and both the nature

and origin of the said currents, it is possible that the litter being found is from quite far

afield. Other factors also include outflows from rivers and storm drains etc. If this is the

most common source for the marine debris then it is likely that weather changes, which

have an impact on both tidelines and sea turbulence, will have a direct and noticeableeffect on the amount of rubbish washed up.

Marine litter is prevalent along the Caribbean coast and is not only unsightly but a health

hazard to marine life and humans alike. In order to collect more data on this issue a beach

clean program will be conducted every phase. This is part of a worldwide program and is

just one method of investigation to discover where marine litter originates from and which

materials are most common.

5.2 Aims

This project has three main aims:

• Quantified data and photographic evidence as to the extent of marine litter.

• Conservation of terrestrial and marine fauna threatened by litter.

• Improvement of beach aesthetics.

• Creation of a monitoring programme that can be implemented in other locations

within the reserve.

5.3 Methodology

Marine litter is collected weekly on a 300 metre stretch of beach south of base. The

transect is cleared one week prior to the commencement of the monitoring program, in

order that only a weekly amount of debris is recorded. Materials are collected from the

tidemark to the vegetation line to eliminate waste created by inland terrestrial sources.

© GVI – 2010 Page 24



The waste is separated, weighed and recorded by the categories below:

• Fabric

• Glass

• Plastic

• Polystyrene

• Metal

• Natural material (modified)

• Medical waste

• Rubber

• Rope

• Other

5.4 Results

Nine representative weekly litter picks were conducted this phase, collecting a total of 60.6

kg of marine litter. Plastic accounted for approximately 50.1% of the total weight collected.

Even though polystyrene was one of the lightest categories in terms of weight, a large

percentage of polystyrene contributed to the overall breakdown of total rubbish collected.

Figure 5-4-1. Breakdown of marine litter collected during phase 112 (Kg)

© GVI – 2010 Page 25



5.5 Discussion

As has been the case for the majority of monitors, plastics have again constituted the

largest volume of all the categories this phase. This could be due to its light weight making

it easy to transport and its robustness against degradation. The fact that the level of plastic

found is consistently high from phase to phase is a worrying trend as when plastics such

as Polythene, found in plastic bags, breakdown they form smaller plastic particles that can

contaminate the food web and be passed on through the trophic levels. Plastic debris can

act like a sponge soaking up toxic chemical compounds. Once these are ingested into the

food chain the high concentrations will be spread from organism to organism until the

levels become fatal.

Even though the data shows a large volume of rubbish being collected from a relatively

small section of beach, the results do not do justice to the actual problem at hand. Plastic

bottles collected may not necessarily be washed up by sea, but could be deposited on

land by visitors. In addition, heavier materials such as metals and water logged fabrics are

likely to sink to the sea bed, and subsequently would not get washed up on our shorelines

and included in the monitoring transects.

© GVI – 2010 Page 26



6. Bird Monitoring Programme

6.1 Introduction

With regard to avi-fauna, Mexico, Central and South America can be divided into threedistinct regions separated by mountain ranges: the Pacific slope, the Interior and the

Atlantic slope. These regions can be further divided into other sub-zones, based on a

variety of habitats.

The Yucatan Peninsula lies on the Atlantic slope and is geographically very different from

the rest of Mexico: It is a low-level limestone shelf on the east coast extending north into

the Caribbean. The vegetation ranges from rainforest in the south to arid scrub

environments in the north. The coastlines are predominantly sandy beaches but alsoinclude extensive networks of mangroves and lagoons, providing a wide variety of habitats

capable of supporting large resident populations of birds.

Due to the location of the Yucatan peninsula, its population of resident breeders is

significantly enlarged by seasonal migrants. There are four different types of migratory

birds: Winter visitors migrate south from North America during the winter (August to May).

Summer residents live and breed in Mexico but migrate to South America for the winter

months. Transient migrants are birds that breed in North America and migrate to South

America in the winter but stop or pass through Mexico. Pelagic visitors are birds that live

offshore but stop or pass through the region.

Pez Maya is located near the town of Tulum inside the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve

between a network of mangrove lagoons and the Caribbean Sea. The local area contains

three key ecosystems; wetland, forest and marine environments.

6.2 Aims

• Develop a species list for the area

• Gain an idea of the abundance and diversity of bird species. Long-term bird data

gathered over a sustained period could highlight trends not noticeable to short-term

surveys.

© GVI – 2010 Page 27



• Educate the volunteers in bird identification techniques, expanding on their general

identification skills. The birding project also provides a good opportunity to obtain a

better understanding of area diversity and the ecosystem as a whole.

6.3 Methodology

Bird monitoring surveys are conducted using a simple methodology based on the bird

monitoring program at Costa Rica Expedition. A member of staff accompanied by

volunteers monitor the transects daily between 6 and 8am. There are five transects –

Beach, Bridge, Road, Base and Mangrove. These transects were selected to cover a

range of habitats, including coastline, mangroves, secondary growth and scrub. The

transects are completed in approximately 30 minutes to allow for consistency of data. To

reduce duplication of data, recordings are taken in one direction only which also helps to

avoid double-counting where individuals are very active or numerous. Birds are identifiedusing binoculars, cameras and a range of identification books. Identification of calls is also

possible for a limited number of species for experienced observers. If the individual

species cannot be identified then birds are recorded to family level.

Each survey records the following information; location, date, start time, end time, name of

recorders and number of each species seen. Wind and cloud cover have also been

recorded to allow consideration of physical parameters.

6.4 Results

During phase 112 (April-June 2011) 20 transects were carried out with 4 at each location

(road, beach, mangrove, base and bridge). Transects lasted an average of 32 minutes

(range 29-38 minutes) and were conducted by 1-6 observers. A total of 1489 individuals

were recorded with 1189 identified to species level and 300 to genus.

The Least tern was the most commonly sighted species with 301 recorded, followed by the

royal tern (194 sightings), Great tailed grackle (183 sightings), White-winged dove (127

sightings) and the Magnificent frigate bird (94 sightings) (Figure 6-4-1).

© GVI – 2010 Page 28



Figure 6-4-1 Total composition of birds sighted in phase 112 (“Other” refers to species presenting a

percentage of 1% or less).

Figure 6-4-2 shows the most commonly recorded species (more than 50 individuals

sighted) in phase 112 (April-June 2011) compared to phase 102 (April-June 2010).

Comparing data from 2010 and 2011 showed a decline in sightings of the most commonly

identified species, the Great-Tailed grackle (from 320 to 283 a reduction of 4%). In phase

112 a decrease in sightings of residential breeders, the Black catbird and the Tropical

mocking bird (4% and 2% respectively). The data shows an increase in sightings of the

Least tern (from 191 to 301, an increase of 10%) showing it to be the most commonly

sighted bird in phase 112. The Royal tern a winter visitor showed a dramatic increase insightings from (40 to 194 an increase of 11%). Fewer transects were carried out in 2011

(20 transects) compared to 2010 (38 transects) which explains why fewer individuals were

recorded in 2011 (2000 and 1489) respectively.

© GVI – 2010 Page 29



Figure 6-4-2. The most commonly recorded species (more than 50) in the second quarter of 2011

(phase 112) compared to 2010 (phase 102).

When broken down into status (Figure 6-4-3) almost half the species sighted were resident

breeders with summer resident breeders being the second most common category (26%)

followed by winter non breeding visitors 20% and finally breeding colony with 8%. A lower

percentage of resident breeders (46%) was shown in phase 112 compared to 102 (65%)

with an increase in winter non breeders from 2% to 20% in 2011. This was manly due to

high numbers of sightings of the Royal tern (194 individuals) making up 86% of the overallwinter visitor sightings.

Figure 6-4-3. Birds sighted by status

© GVI – 2010 Page 30



6.5 Discussion

From phase to phase Pez Maya experiences variations in the numbers and presence of

many species of birds, as the Yucatan peninsula lies along a major migratory route for

many of the species sighted in this area. Fluctuations in the number of sightings between

phases reflect seasonal migration and breeding patterns. As expected for this time of year

the summer breeding colonies are present in high numbers such as the Least tern

showing the highest number of individuals recorded this phase. A high percentage of non

breeding winter visitors were shown which is uncommon for the timing of this phase this

was manly due to a high number of sightings of the royal tern. In phase 112 a colony of

royal terns nested on the beach explaining the unusually high number of sightings for this

time of year. It is probable that the resident individuals were observed regularly and that

their home ranges would cover more than one transect area, accounting for the high

frequency of some of these species.

Reductions in the overall number of individuals sighted could be due to the fact that fewer

transects were carried out in phase 112 compared to 102.

Of the most commonly sighted birds (50 or more sightings) 7 of those seen in phase 102

were again seen in 112. The Laughing gull and the Brown pelican which were classed as

common in 102 were not sighted more than 50 times in phase 112. Phase 112 shows the

addition of the royal tern is seen to the most commonly sighted species contributing to thehigh percentage of winter non breeding visitors. The bird survey continues to be an

important part of GVI's work in Pez Maya, providing a simple overview of the diversity,

abundance, breeding colonies and migratory routes of avi-fauna in the area.

© GVI – 2010 Page 31



7. References

AGRRA (2000) Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA). The AGRRA Rapid

Assessment Protocol. http://www.agrra.org/method/methodhome.htm

Almada-Villela P.C., Sale P.F., Gold-Bouchot G. Kjerfve B. (2003) Manual of Methods for

the MBRS Synoptic Monitoring System: Selected Methods for Monitoring Physical and

Biological Parameters for Use in the Mesoamerican Region. Mesoamerican Barrier Reef

Systems Project (MBRS).

Deloach, N. (1999) Reef fish behaviour . New World Publications, Inc

Humann, N. & DeLoach, P. (2008) Reef Coral Identification: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas.

Florida: New World Publications,

Humann, N. & DeLoach, P. (2008) Reef Fish Identification: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas.

Florida: New World Publications.

McClanahan, T.R., Muthiga, N.A. (1998) An ecological shift in a remote coral atoll of Belize

over 25 years. Environmental Conservation 25: 122-130.

Morris, J.R, Akins, J.L., Barse, A., Cerino, D., Freshwater, D. W., Green, S.J., Munoz, R.C.

Paris, C., Whitfield, P.E. (2009). Biology and Ecology of the Invasive Lionfishes, Pterois

miles and Pterois volitans. Proceedings of the 61st Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute

November 10 - 14, 2008. 1-6.

Padilla C., Gutierrez D. Lara M., Garcia C. 1992. Coral Reefs of the Biosphere Reserve of

Sian Ka’an, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Proceedings of the International Coral Reef

Symposium, Guam. 2, 986-992.

© GVI – 2010 Page 32

http://www.agrra.org/method/methodhome.htm





Sampayo, E.M, Ridgeway, T., Bongaerts, P. & Hoegh-Goldberg, O. (2008). Bleaching

susceptibility and mortality of corals are determined by fine-scale differences in symbiont

type. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. 105, 10444-10449.

Schutte, V. G. W., Selig, E. R. & Bruno, J. F. (2010). Regional spatio-temporal trends inCaribbean coral reef benthic communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 402, 115-122.

Spalding, M.D., Jarvis, G.E. (2002). The impact of the 1998 coral mortality on reef fish

communities in the Seychelles. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44: 309-321.

UNEP-WCMC (2006). In the front line: shoreline protection and other ecosystem services

from mangroves and coral reefs. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK.

© GVI – 2010 Page 33



8. Appendices

Appendix I – SMP Methodology OutlinesBuddy method 1: Surveys of corals, algae and other sessile organisms

At each monitoring site five replicate 30m transect lines are deployed randomly within

100m of the GPS point. The transect line is laid across the reef surface at a constant

depth, usually perpendicular to the reef slope.

The first diver of this monitoring buddy pair collects data on the characterisation of the

coral community under the transect line. Swimming along the transect line the diver

identifies, to species level, each hermatypic coral directly underneath the transect that is at

least 10cm at its widest point and in the original growth position. If a colony has been

knocked or has fallen over, it is only recorded if it has become reattached to the

substratum. The diver also records the water depth at the beginning and end of each

transect.

The diver then identifies the colony boundaries based on verifiable connective or common

skeleton. Using a measuring pole, the colonies projected diameter (live plus dead areas) in

plan view and maximum height (live plus dead areas) from the base of the colonies

substratum are measured.

From plane view perspective, the percentage of coral that is not healthy (separated into

old dead and recent dead) is also estimated.

The first diver also notes any cause of mortality including diseases and/or predation and

any bleached tissue present. The diseases are characterised using the following

categories:

Black band disease Red band disease

White band disease Hyperplasm and Neoplasm (irregular growths)

White plague Dark spot diseaseYellow blotch disease Unknown

© GVI – 2010 Page 34



Predation and overgrowth are also recorded on each of the coral colonies. The following

categories are considered:

Parrotfish predation Fire coral predation

Damselfish predation Gorgonian predationFireworm predation Zoanthid predationShort coral snail predation Coralline algae overgrowthOvergrowing mat tunicate Sponge overgrowthVariable boring sponge Cliona sp.

Bleaching is described as either pale, partial of total using the following definitions:

Pale – the majority of the colony is pale compared to the original colour of the coral

Partial – the colony has a significant amount of patchy white areas

Total – all, or almost all, of the colony is white

Any other features of note are also recorded, including, orange icing sponge, coralcompetition and Christmas tree worms.

The second diver measures the percentage cover of sessile organisms and substrate

along the 30m transect, recording the nature of the substrate or organism directly every

25cm along the transect. Organisms are classified into the following groups:

Coralline algae - crusts or finely branched algae that are hard (calcareous.

Turf algae - may look fleshy and/or filamentous but do not rise more than 1cm above the

substrate

Macroalgae - include fleshy and calcareous algae whose fronds are projected more than

1cm above the substrate. Three of these are further classified into additional groups which

include Halimeda, Dictyota, and Lobophora

Gorgonians

Hermatypic corals - to species level, where possible

Bare rock, sand and rubble

Any other sessile organisms e.g. sponges, tunicates, zoanthids and hydroids.

Buddy method 2: Belt transect counts for coral reef fish

© GVI – 2010 Page 35



At each monitoring site 8 replicate 30m transects lines are deployed randomly within 100m

of the GPS point. The transect line is laid just above the reef surface at a constant depth,

usually perpendicular to the reef slope. The first diver is responsible for swimming slowly

along the transect line identifying, counting and estimating the sizes of specific indicator

fish species in their adult phase. The diver visually estimates a two metre by two metre‘corridor’ and carries a one meter T-bar divided into 10cm graduations to aid the accuracy

of the size estimation of the fish identified. The fish are assigned to the following size

categories:

0-5cm 21-30cm

6-10cm 31-40cm

11-20cm >40cm (with size specified)

The buddy pair then waits for three minutes at a short distance from the end of the

transect line before proceeding. This allows juvenile fish to return to their original positions

before they were potentially scared off by the divers during the adult transect. The second

diver swims slowly back along the transect surveying a one metre by one metre ‘corridor’

and identifying and counting the presence of newly settled fish of the target species. In

addition, it is also this diver’s responsibility to identify and count the Banded Shrimp,

Stenopus hispidus. This is a collaborative effort with UNAM to track this species as their

population is slowly dwindling due to their direct removal for the aquarium trade. The juvenile diver also counts any Diadema antillarum individuals found on their transects.

This is aimed at tracking the slow come back of these urchins.

Buddy Method 3: Coral & Fish Rover divers

At each monitoring site the third buddy pair completes a thirty minute survey of the site in

an expanding square pattern, with one diver recording all adult fish species observed. The

approximate density of each fish species is categorised using the following numerations:

Single (1 fish)

Few (2-10 fish)

Many (11-100 fish)

Abundant (>100 fish)

© GVI – 2010 Page 36



The second diver swims alongside the Fish Rover diver and records, to species level, all

coral communities observed, regardless of size. The approximate density of each coral

species is then categorised using similar ranges to those for fish:

Single (1 community)

Few (2-10 communities)

Many (11-50 communities)

Abundant (>50 communities)

© GVI – 2010 Page 37



Appendix II - Adult Fish Indicator Species List

The following list includes only the adult fish species that are surveyed during monitoring

dives.

© GVI – 2010 Page 38

Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common Name

Acanthurus coeruleus, Blue Tang Scarus guacamaia Rainbow Parrotfish Acanthurus bahianus, Ocean Surgeonfish Scarus vetula Queen Parrotfish Acanthurus chirurgus, Doctorfish Sparisoma viride Stoplight ParrotfishChaetodon striatus, Banded Butterflyfish Scarus taeniopterus Princess ParrotfishChaetodon capistratus, Four Eye Butterflyfish Scarus iserti Striped ParrotfishChaetodon ocellatus, Spotfin Butterflyfish Sparisoma aurofrenatum Redband ParrotfishChaetodon aculeatus, Longsnout Butterflyfish Sparisoma chrysopterum Redtail ParrotfishHaemulon flavolineatum French Grunt Sparisoma rubripinne Yellowtail Parrotfish

Haemulon striatum Striped Grunt Sparisoma atomarium Greenblotch ParrotfiHaemulon plumierii White Grunt Sparisoma radians Bucktooth ParrotfishHaemulon sciurus Bluestriped Grunt Epinephelus itajara Goliath Grouper Haemulon carbonarium Caesar Grunt Epinephelus striatus Nassau Grouper Haemulon chrysargyreum Smallmouth Grunt Mycteroperca venenosa Yellowfin Grouper Haemulon aurolineatum Tomtate Mycteroperca bonaci Black Grouper Haemulon melanurum Cottonwick Mycteroperca tigris Tiger Grouper Haemulon macrostomum Spanish Grunt Mycteroperca interstitialis Yellowmouth GroupeHaemulon parra Sailor’s Choice Epinephelus guttatus Red HindHaemulon album White Margate Epinephelus adscensionis Rock Hind

Anisotremus virginicus Porkfish Cephalopholis cruentatus Graysby Anisotremus surinamensis Black Margate Cephalopholis fulvus ConeyLutjanus analis Mutton Snapper Balistes vetula Queen TriggerfishLutjanus griseus Gray Snapper Balistes capriscus Gray Triggerfish

Lutjanus cyanopterus Cubera Snapper Canthidermis sufflamen Ocean TriggerfishLutjanus jocu Dog Snapper Xanithichthys ringens Sargassum TriggerfiLutjanus mahogoni Mahaogany Snapper Melichthys niger Black DurgonLutjanus apodus Schoolmaster Aluterus scriptus Scrawled FilefishLutjanus synagris Lane Snapper Cantherhines pullus Orangespotted FilefiOcyurus chrysurus Yellowtail Snapper Cantherhines macrocerus Whitespotted FilefishHolacanthus ciliaris Queen Angelfish Bodianus rufus Spanish HogfishPomacanthus paru French Angelfish Lachnolaimus maximus HogfishPomacanthus arcuatus Grey Angelfish Caranx rubber Bar JackHolacanthus tricolour Rock Beauty Microspathodon chrysurus Yellowtail DamselfisScarus coeruleus Blue Parrotfish Sphyraena barracuda Great Barracuda

Scarus coelestinus Midnight Parrotfish



Appendix III - Juvenile Fish Indicator Species List

The subsequent list specifies the juvenile fish species and their maximum target length

that are recorded during monitoring dives

Scientific Name Common Name Max. target length (cm)

Acanthurus bahianus Ocean surgeonfish 5 Acanthurus coeruleus Blue tang 5Chaetodon capistratus Foureye butterflyfish 2Chaetodon striatus Banded butterflyfish 2Gramma loreto Fairy basslet 3Bodianus rufus Spanish hogfish 3.5Halichoeres bivittatus Slipperydick 3Halichoeres garnoti Yellowhead wrasse 3Halichoeres maculipinna Clown wrasse 3

Thalassoma bifasciatum Bluehead wrasse 3Halichoeres pictus Rainbow wrasse 3Chromis cyanea Blue chromis 3.5Stegastes adustus Dusky damselfish 2.5Stegastes diencaeus Longfin damselfish 2.5Stegastes leucostictus Beaugregory 2.5Stegastes partitus Bicolour damselfish 2.5Stegastes planifrons Threespot damselfish 2.5Stegastes variabilis Cocoa damselfish 2.5Scarus iserti Striped parrotfish 3.5Scarus taeniopterus Princess parrotfish 3.5Sparisoma atomarium Greenblotch parrotfish 3.5Sparisoma aurofrenatum Redband parrotfish 3.5Sparisoma viride Stoplight parrotfish 3.5

© GVI – 2010 Page 39



Appendix IV - Coral Species List

© GVI – 2010 Page 40

Family Genus Species Family Genus Species

Acroporidae Acropora cervicornis Meandrinidae Dendrogyra cylindrus

Acroporidae Acropora palmata Meandrinidae Dichocoenia stokesii Acroporidae Acropora prolifera Meandrinidae Meandrina meandrites

Agariciidae Agaricia agaricites Milliporidae Millepora alcicornis

Agariciidae Agaricia fragilis Milliporidae Millepora complanata

Agariciidae Agaricia grahamae Mussidae Isophyllastrea rigida

Agariciidae Agaricia lamarcki Mussidae Isophyllia sinuosa

Agariciidae Agaricia tenuifolia Mussidae Mussa angulosa

Agariciidae Agaricia undata Mussidae Mycetophyllia aliciae

Agariciidae Helioceris cucullata Mussidae Mycetophyllia ferox

Antipatharia Cirrhipathes leutkeni Mussidae Mycetophyllia lamarckiana

Astrocoeniidae Stephanocoenia intersepts Mussidae Mycetophyllia reesi

Caryophylliidae Eusmilia fastigiana Mussidae Scolymia sp.

Faviidae Colpophyllia natans Pocilloporidae Madracis decactis

Faviidae Diploria clivosa Pocilloporidae Madracis formosa

Faviidae Diploria labrynthiformis Pocilloporidae Madracis mirabilis

Faviidae Diploria strigosa Pocilloporidae Madracis pharensis

Faviidae Favia fragum Poritidae Porites astreoides

Faviidae Manicina areolata Poritidae Porites divaricata

Faviidae Montastraea annularis Poritidae Porites furcata

Faviidae Montastraea cavernosa Poritidae Porites porites

Faviidae Montastraea faveolata Siderastridae Siderastrea radians

Faviidae Montastraea franksi Siderastridae Siderastrea sidereal

Faviidae Solenastrea bournoni Stylasteridae Stylaster roseus

Faviidae Solenastrea hyades



Appendix V - Fish Species List

This list was begun for Pez Maya in 2003. This list is compiled from the Adult and Rover

diver surveys.

© GVI – 2010 Page 41



© GVI – 2010 Page 42

Family Genus Species Common Names

Acanthuridae Acanthurus Bahianus Ocean surgeonfish

Acanthuridae Acanthurus Chirurgus Doctorfish

Acanthuridae Acanthurus Coeruleus Blue tang

Atherinidae, Clupeidae, Engraulididae Silversides, Herrings, AnchoviesAulostomidae Aulostomus Maculates Trumpetfish

Balistidae Balistes Capriscus Gray triggerfish

Balistidae Balistes Vetula Queen triggerfish

Balistidae Canthidermis Sufflamen Ocean triggerfish

Balistidae Melichthys Niger Black durgon

Balistidae Xanithichthys Ringens Sargassum triggerfish

Bothidae Bothus Lunatus Peacock flounder Carangidae Caranx Bartholomaei Yellow jack

Carangidae Caranx Crysos Blue runner

Carangidae Caranx Ruber Bar jack

Carangidae Trachinotus Falcatus Permit

Centropomidae Centropomus Undecimalis Common snook

Chaenopsidae Lucayablennius Zingaro Arrow blenny

Chaetodontidae Chaetodon Aculeatus Longsnout butterflyfish

Chaetodontidae Chaetodon Capistratus Foureye butterflyfish

Chaetodontidae Chaetodon Ocellatus Spotfin butterflyfish

Chaetodontidae Chaetodon Sedentarius Reef butterflyfish

Chaetodontidae Chaetodon Striatus Banded butterflyfish

Cirrhitidae Amblycirrhitus Pinos Red spotted hawkfish

Congridae Heteroconger Longissimus Brown garden eel

Dasyatidae Dasyatis Americana Southern stingray

Diodontidae Diodon Holocanthus Balloonfish

Elopidae Megalops Atlanticus Tarpon

Gobiidae Coryphopterus Eidolon Palid Goby

Gobiidae Coryphopterus Glaucofraenum Bridled goby

Gobiidae Coryphopterus Lipernes Peppermint goby

Gobiidae Coryphopterus personatus/hyalinus Masked/glass goby

Gobiidae Gnatholepis Thompsoni Goldspot goby

Gobiidae Gobiosoma Oceanops Neon goby.

Gobiidae Gobiosoma Prochilos Broadstripe gobyGrammatidae Gramma Loreto Fairy basslet

Family Genus Species Common Names

Grammatidae Gymnothorax Funebris Green moray

Grammatidae Gymnothorax Moringa Spotted moray

Haemulidae Anisotremus Virginicus Porkfish

Haemulidae Haemulon Album White margate

Haemulidae Haemulon Aurolineatum Tomtate

Haemulidae Haemulon Carbonarium Ceaser Grunt

Haemulidae Haemulon Flavolineatum French grunt

Haemulidae Haemulon Macrostomum Spanish grunt

Haemulidae Haemulon Plumierii White gruntHaemulidae Haemulon Sciurus Bluestriped grunt

Haemulidae Haemulon Striatum Striped grunt

Haemulidae Anisotremus Surinamensis Black margate

Haemulidae Haemulon Parra Sailor’s choice

Holocentridae Holocentrus Adscensionis Squirrelfish

Holocentridae Holocentrus Rufus Longspine squirrelfish

Holocentridae Myripristis Jacobus Blackbar soldierfish

Holocentridae Neoniphon Marianus Longjaw squirrelfish

Holocentridae Sargocentron Bullisi Deepwater squirrelfish

Holocentridae Sargocentron Coruscum Reef squirrelfish

Holocentridae Sargocentron Vexillarium Dusky squirrelfish

Kyphosidae Kyphosus sectatrix/incisor Chub

Labridae Bodianus Rufus Spanish hogfish



Appendix VI - Bird Species List

Bird species identified to species level in Pez Maya.

Common name Species Common name Species

Great-tailed grackle Quiscalus mexicanus Wilson's plover Charadrius wilsonia

Magnificent frigatebird Fregata magnificens Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon

Ruddy turnstone Arenaria interpres Cinnamon hummingbird Amazilia rutila

Royal tern Sterna m. maxima Common black-hawk Buteogallus anthracinus

Tropical mockingbird Mimus gilvus Common ground-dove Columbina passerina

Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis Melodious blackbird Dives dives

Sanderling Calidris alba Mangrove Vireo Vireo pallens

Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia Spot Breasted Wren Thryothorus maculipectus

Osprey Pandion haliaetus Yellow-crowned Night-

Heron

Nycticorax violaceus

Black catbird Dumetella glabrirostris Black-bellied Plover Pluvialis squatarola

White Ibis Eudocimus albus Black-crowned Night-

Heron

Nycticorax nycticorax hoactli

Turkey vulture Cathartes aura Black vulture Coragyps atratus

Hooded Oriole Icterus cucullatus Great Egret Egretta alba egretta

Snowy egret Egretta thula Green kingfisher Chloroceryle americana

Bananaquit Coereba flaveola Laughing gull Larus atricilla

Golden-fronted

Woodpecker

Centurus aurifrons Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea

Great blue heron Ardea herodias Mangrove warbler Dendroica erithachorides

Yellow-throated warbler Dendroica dominica Neotropic Cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus

Bare-throated Tiger heron Tigrisoma mexicanum Roseate spoonbill Platalea ajaja

Semipalmated sandpiper Calidris pusilla Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria

White-collared Seedeater Sporophila torqueola Tricolored heron Egretta tricolor

Great Kiskadee Pitangus sulphuratus White-winged dove Zenaida asiatica

Plain Chachalaca Ortalis vetula

Date post:	06-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	gvi-mexico
View:	224 times
Download:	0 times

Pez Maya April-June 2011 Quaterly Report

Documents