vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA/600/R-14/368 | December 2014
www.epa.gov/ord
Coral Reef Monitoring Needs
Assessment Workshop
U.S. Virgin Islands
Workshop Hosted by USVI
Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR)
Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI
September 11-13, 2007
Office of Research and Development
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
-------
-------
EPA/600/R-14/368 | December 2014
www.epa.gov/ord
Coral Reef Monitoring Needs
Assessment Workshop
September 11-13, 2007
St. Croix, USVI
by
Patricia Bradley
US EPA
Atlantic Ecology Division
NHEERL, ORD
33 East Quay Road
Key West, FL 33040
William Fisher
US EPA
Gulf Ecology Division
NHEERL, ORD
1 Sabine Island Drive
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
Leska Fore
Statistical Design
136 NW 40th Street
Seattle, WA 98107
Contract No. EP-C-06-033
Work Assignment 2-11
Great Lakes Environmental Center, Inc.
Project Officer:
Susan K. Jackson
US EPA
Office of Water
Washington, DC 20460
Work Assignment Manager:
Wayne Davis
US EPA
Office of Environmental Information
Ft. Meade, MD 20755
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
Notice and Disclaimer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development and
Office of Water funded and collaborated in the research described here under EP-C-06-033,
Work Assignment #2-11, to Great Lakes Environmental Center, Inc. It has been subjected to the
Agency's peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA
document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
Under authority of the Clean Water Act (CWA), EPA is committed to protecting the biological
integrity of the Nation's waters, including marine coastal habitats such as mangroves,
seagrasses and coral reefs that lie within the 3-mile territorial waters.
This report summarizes an EPA-sponsored workshop on monitoring coral reef ecosystems held
in St. Croix, USVI, on September 11-13, 2007.
The long-term goal is to develop biological assessment methods and tools for evaluating the
health of coral reefs so that States and Territories could more easily establish biological water
quality standards, including descriptions for designated waterbody uses and biological criteria
(biocriteria). This is a contribution to the EPA Office of Research and Development's Safe and
Sustainable Waters Research Program, Coral Reefs Project.
The appropriate citation for this report is:
Bradley P, Fisher W and Fore L. 2014. Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop,
St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, September 11-13, 2007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, Narragansett, Rl. EPA/600/R-14/368.
This document can be downloaded from: http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators
ii | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table of Contents
Notice and Disclaimer ii
Figures iv
Tables vi
Acknowledgements vii
Executive Summary viii
Chapter 1. Background 1
1.1 Ecosystem-based approach to resource management 1
1.2 The integrated monitoring framework 2
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop 5
2.1 Seven steps toward integrated monitoring 6
2.2 Case examples 23
2.3 Monitoring for biocriteria water quality standards 25
Chapter 3. Summary and Lessons Learned 27
3.1 Lessons learned 27
3.2 Next steps 28
Appendices:
A. About the U.S. Virgin Islands 33
B. Workshop Agenda 39
C. Workshop Participants 41
D. Organizations Represented at the Workshop 43
E. Recent Coral Reef Workshops in USVI or Related to USVI Coral Reefs 47
F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations 51
G. Draft USVI Objectives Hierarchy 83
H. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program, U.S. Virgin Islands Coral Reef
Management Priorities 87
I. Buck Island Reef National Monument (BUIS) Centennial Strategy 93
J. Virgin Islands National Park Centennial Strategy 95
K. Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument (VICR) Centennial Initiative 101
L. St. Croix East End Marine Park (EEMP) Management Plan 105
M. Objectives Crosswalk 107
N. The DPSIR Framework 115
0. References 119
Table of Contents I iii
-------
Figures
2-1. Framework to compare indicators 21
A-l. Map of the U.S. Virgin Islands 33
A-2. Bathymetry of the northeast corner of the Caribbean plate 34
F-l. The DPSIR conceptual model 52
F-2. USVI coastal water designated uses 55
F-3. Condition index responsive to human disturbance 57
F-4. Boundaries for the Virgin Islands National Park and Virgin Island Coral Reef
National Monument 58
F-5. Coral reef monitoring protocol 59
F-6. Average monthly seawater temperatures in USVI (historical and 2005) 59
F-7. Bleaching on USVI reefs during the 2005 event 60
F-8. Buck Island Reef National Monument boundaries 61
F-9. Monitoring approaches employed at BIRNM 62
F-10. NCAA's RV Nancy Foster and ROV 62
F-ll. East End Marine Park, St. Croix, USVI boundaries 63
F-12. Species of concern - Caribbean Spiny Lobster and Elkhorn Coral 64
F-13. Initial steps in the NOAA biogeographic assessment 66
F-14. Biogeography Program station locations in St. John, USVI, 2000-2006 67
F-15. Biogeography Program station locations around Buck Island, USVI, 2000-2006 68
F-16. NOAA transect and example of data collected along the transect 69
F-17. Benthic cover by geographic area 70
F-18. Benthic cover by habitat type 70
F-19. Species-habitat relationships 71
F-20. Temporal trends in fish assemblages around Buck Island, St. Croix 71
F-21. Temporal trends in fish assemblages at the VMS, St. John 72
F-22. Spatial patterns of episodic bleaching- Buck Island, St. Croix 72
F-23. Episodic bleaching- BUIS, St. Croix 73
F-24. Freshwater bioassessment programs in use in U.S. states 74
F-25. Indicators that can be derived from the EPA stony coral RBP 76
F-26. Photograph of Diploria strigosa colony 76
iv | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
F-27. EPA Sampling stations around St. Croix, USVI, in 2006 evaluation of EPA
stony coral RBP 77
F-28. Seven coastal management zones were defined by USVI managers and scientists.... 78
F-29. EPA reef station locations along the south side commercial area of St. Croix, USVI... 78
F-30. A proposed sampling along a gradient of human disturbance 79
F-31. Station locations for a probabilistic survey design conducted by EPA in St. Croix,
USVI, in 2007 81
Figures | v
-------
Tables
1-1. Estimated annual benefits of coral reefs in the USVI 1
1-2. Contrasting features of the management and science cultures 3
2-1. Summary of Agency information 8
2-2. Management issues derived from discussions during the workshop and whether
the issue operates at a global, regional or local scale 12
2.3. Local management issues of concern for coral reefs in USVI grouped by topic 12
2-4. Preliminary assessment questions developed during the workshop 15
2-5. Assessment questions, tools and measurements, data needs and availability, and type
of sampling design needed to answer the question for a single management issue
("Sustainable fisheries") and a single monitoring objective ("Maintain native fish
community") 19
2-6. Comparison of the monitoring approach and the sampling design used to answer
the five main monitoring questions 23
2-7. Proposed long-term monitoring strategy for USVI 26
F-l. Total assessed waters for USVI 54
F-2. USVI assessed waters, individual use support for oceans and near coastal waters 54
F-3. USVI assessed waters, attainment status for oceans and near coastal waters 54
F-4. USVI top causes of impairments for oceans and near coastal waters 55
F-5. Types of metrics that can be calculated for NOAA data 69
F-6. Stony coral indicators 79
F-7. Stony coral metric testing 80
vi | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Acknowledgements
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research and Development (ORD)
prepared this coral reefs report. This workshop was convened through the collaborative efforts
of the U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR), Division of
Environmental Protection (DEP), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Region 2,
Office of Water (OW), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), and Office of Research and
Development (ORD). These organizations have recognized the necessity of planning and cross-
agency coordination in coral reef management and have taken the initiative to work beyond
the conventional implementation of the existing Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory framework
to explore innovative methods for dealing with the growing complexity of stressors to sensitive
coral reef resources. The technical content of the workshop was developed and facilitated by
Patricia Bradley (ORD), William Fisher, (ORD), Leska Fore (Statistical Design), Wayne Davis (OEI),
Heidi Bell (OW), and Charles LoBue (Region 2). Susan Jackson (OW) provided funding support
for the workshop. We would like to recognize the contributions of several other people for their
outstanding efforts in making this workshop possible. First, we would like to thank Nadine
Noorhasan, (DPNR) for hosting this workshop and dedicating staff and resources to deal with
the planning, logistics, and communications; Anita Nibbs (DPNR) for her astute technical input
regarding DPNR's CWA program; and Kysha Wallace (DPNR) for her tireless efforts and
professional manner in securing all meeting arrangements. Special thanks to Aaron Hutchins
(Office of the DPNR Commissioner) for leadership initiating and advancing CWA biological
criteria into DPNR's Water Quality Programs.
EPA was supported in the development of this report by the Great Lakes Environmental Center,
Inc., through contract EP-C-06-033.
This report was peer reviewed by: John Carriger and John Kiddon (US EPA, ORD), Heidi Faller
(US EPA, OW), and Charles (Buddy) LoBue (US EPA, Region 2).
Acknowledgements | vii
-------
Executive Summary
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Virgin Island Department of Planning
and Natural Resources (DPNR) held a workshop September 11-13, 2007, in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (USVI), to begin the process of designing a monitoring program that meets multiple
management objectives. The Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop was an
information sharing and brainstorming session that provided an opportunity to explore
alternative ways to compress a complex ecological system into a small set of variables and
functions that could potentially address a variety of management perspectives. Through a
facilitated process, workshop participants began to develop an assessment framework for USVI
coral reefs that addresses both anthropogenic and natural stressors across a range of spatial
and temporal scales. An organizing framework was introduced as a systems-based approach to
emphasize the interconnectedness of ecological, economic, and social components.
Assessment questions were developed at the workshop and subsequently organized into an
objectives hierarchy and means-end network. A rotating panel monitoring design was
developed as a result of the workshop presentations and discussions. Potential indicators were
discussed.
viii | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Chapter 1. Background
The coral reefs of the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) are a natural resource of tremendous local and
national value. USVI (Appendix A) is home to breathtaking coral reefs that support a wide
variety of marine organisms, including hundreds of fish, coral, gorgonian and other large
invertebrate species. The coral reefs provide substantial ecosystem goods and services
including subsistence and commercial fisheries, protection of beaches and coastline from storm
surges and waves, tourism and recreation, sand and building material, and wildlife habitat
(Table 1-1).
Many organizations are concerned with the management and protection of USVI coral reef
ecosystems. The USVI Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) plays an
important role, but other organizations are also responsible for the long-range sustainability of
USVI's coral reefs, including the U.S. Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] and Caribbean Fishery Management Council), the U.S.
Department of Interior (National Park Service and U.S. Geological Survey), and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In addition, a variety of universities, non-governmental
organizations, and citizen science groups are actively conducting research and assessment of
USVI coral reefs. The goals and mission of the organizations are diverse but there are
interrelated concerns about water quality, conservation of biodiversity, fishing, recreation, and
aesthetic value.
Table 1-1. Estimated annual benefits of coral reefs in the USVI (modified from: van Beukering
etal. 2013)
Ecosystem Service
Tourism
Recreation & Culture
Amenity
Coastal Protection
Fishery
Research & Education
Total annual economic value
Average (2010 US $ million/year)
102.9
51.1
37.1
6.7
3.3
1.0
202.1
1.1 Ecosystem-based approach to resource management
Ecosystem-based management (EBM) is an adaptive management approach to sustainably
balance ecological, economic, and social goals and objectives. EBM considers the entire
ecosystem, including humans, with a goal to maintain the ecosystem in a healthy, productive
and resilient condition in order to provide the goods and services humans desire now and in the
future (Ehler and Douvere 2009). To effectively address the complex and long-term
environmental management issues, USVI DPNR has identified the need for consistent,
comprehensive, and scientifically defensible monitoring to detect environmental status and
trends for USVI coral reef ecosystems. EBM is one of the few approaches that is likely to
achieve this.
Successful resource management often relies on methods that restore and sustain the health,
productivity, and biological diversity of the ecosystem that supports the resource. Selective
Chapter 1. Background | 1
-------
focus on a single resource (such as fish), rather than the supportive habitat and community
structure, can easily lead to inadequate protection and failed management plans. The EBM
approach relies on a shared community vision — attained through collaborative agreement
among residents, scientists and managers — for the future of the resource and its supporting
ecosystem. It is applied within a geographic framework defined by ecological boundaries and
considers the entire ecosystem, including humans.
EBM is a common-sense way for public and private managers to carry out their mandates with
greater efficiency. The ecosystem assessment must be responsive to three levels of interest -
the people who live in and around the ecosystem, the environmental managers, and the
scientists. DPNR and EPA are exploring the EBM approach for USVI coral reef ecosystems.
1.2 The integrated monitoring framework
In 2006, USVI DPNR requested EPA assistance to develop an integrated coral reef monitoring
program that could meet Clean Water Act (CWA) requirements, including development of
biological criteria. For the purposes of this report, the Hedge et al. (2013) definition of
integrated monitoring has been adopted: the objective and systematic integration of interests,
data and knowledge across policy, management and science sectors to monitor, analyze and
report on the effectiveness of management of USVI coral reefs.
USVI has limited institutional resources to monitor, protect and restore coral reef ecosystems,
so efficient monitoring and management are imperative. Monitoring programs and scientific
studies can provide a wealth of information — but not all of it is usable in management
decisions. Coral reef monitoring performed in USVI at the time of the workshop was associated
primarily with permit compliance, specific project performance, or scientific research, and was
therefore largely site specific. Many of the monitoring activities were small-scale (e.g., a single
park or coral reef) and relatively short-term (less than 3 years). Furthermore, these efforts were
applied independently with monitoring protocols that were usually not comparable.
Consequently, aggregation of data for ecosystem level or USVI-wide trends was difficult if not
impossible. With only site-specific, independent monitoring activities, meaningful territorial
assessments useful in a comprehensive management scheme were unavailable.
Constructing an integrated monitoring process is iterative and collaborative. Several discussions
over time are required among scientists and managers to characterize different management
issues, refine issue-oriented assessment questions, identify key uncertainties, and collect and
organize essential information. Meetings or workshops between scientists and managers can
be convened to crystallize specific assessment questions to be addressed in an integrated
monitoring program. A needs assessment workshop, such as the one described here, allows
people from differing jobs, levels of expertise, and backgrounds to move towards a common
vision.
2 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
A framework can be used to guide this process:
• Establish a common vision
• Identify management issues
• Define monitoring objectives
• Formulate assessment questions
• Identify appropriate tools and measurements
Ensuring good communication among stakeholders, scientists and managers from various
agencies is critical for the success of an integrated monitoring plan and EBM. The "mental
models" of people with different responsibilities and perspectives on a particular issue can be
quite different. For example, resource managers in DPNR are tasked with managing resources
within the regulatory framework of both federal and territorial environmental protection laws.
For some regulatory applications, specific assessment questions and implementation methods
may be required that are not needed by other resource agencies.
Although some applied science is useful to managers, often assessment questions for
management may seem completely irrelevant to research scientists, who are interested in
investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating knowledge
for scientific advancement. The data and information collected from their monitoring programs
are not always applicable to the managers, particularly for regulatory applications. These are
not issues unique to USVI — the many cultural differences between collaborating resource
managers and scientists are well known (Table 1-2).
Table 1-2. Contrasting features of management and science cultures (Bernstein et al. 1993)
Aspect
Valued action
Timeframe
Goals
Basis for decisions
Expectations
Granularity
World view
Science
• Research
• Period of time needed to gather
evidence
• Increase understanding
• Scientific evidence
• Understanding never complete
• Focus on details, contradictions
• Primacy of biological, physical,
chemical mechanisms
• Factors (including human activities)
heavily parameterized
Management
• Decisions, plans
• Immediate, short-term
• Manage problems, set policy
• Science, values, opinion, economics, legal
• Expect clear answers from science that
form the basis of decisions
• Focus on broad outline
• Primacy of political, social, interpersonal,
economic considerations
• Factors often dealt with qualitatively
Chapter 1. Background | 3
-------
Integrated monitoring draws together existing monitoring efforts and provides a systematic
view of future monitoring needs and requirements. Integrated monitoring, when planned and
implemented effectively, will provide the following benefits:
• Better understanding of cause-and-effect relationships within social-ecological systems
and the response of these systems to management actions (represented by a Driver-
Pressure-State-Impact-Response model).
• Cost-effective use of available resources for monitoring the status of USVI coral reefs,
which is achieved through building on, and enhancing existing monitoring efforts and
clearly setting out the priorities and gaps to be addressed by any future monitoring.
The workshop described in the next sections is an initial attempt to bridge these cultural gaps
and establish a set of common assessment questions that can be addressed through an
integrated monitoring program.
4 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
Recognizing the importance of USVI's coral reefs, Aaron Hutchins, the Director of the USVI DPNR
wrote a letter to the Regional Administrator of EPA Region 2 asking for assistance with the
development of protective measures for coral reef ecosystems. In particular he asked for
information and guidance on development of biological criteria for territory water quality
standards. Concurrently, research at ORD's Gulf Ecology Division (GED) was attempting to
characterize coral reef ecosystems in a manner that could accommodate CWA management and
regulatory tools. Kennard Potts of EPA's Office of Water had recently completed the acquisition
and upgrade of the Ocean Survey Vessel (OSV) BOLD for EPA ocean assessments and recognized its
potential use in assessing coral reefs in USVI. The three different activities converged in 2006, when
EPA studies to develop coral reef biocriteria indicators and assessment methods were initiated in
USVI. The OSV BOLD was used as a platform for diving operations coordinated by GED, which
included research divers from EPA Region 2, GED and USVI.
Building on the success of the 2006 coral reef survey, EPA ORD, Region 2 and DPNR held a
workshop with USVI coral reef managers (federal and territorial) to:
• Identify existing efforts to build from:
• Prior workshops
• Monitoring and assessment activities
• Characterize agency regulatory and management questions that require resource monitoring
• Initiate a process for designing a monitoring program to meet multiple management
objectives
The workshop agenda is provided in Appendix B, workshop participants in Appendix C, and brief
descriptions of organizations represented at the workshop in Appendix D.
Prior to the workshop, participants provided results of six other workshops in 2006-2007 related to
coral reef monitoring and protection in the USVI (Appendix E, updated with current information).
This level of engagement underscored the widespread interest by federal and regional entities in
the condition of USVI's coral reefs. The Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop described here
was similar to the Vital Signs Monitoring Workshop sponsored by the National Park Service in
which participants ranked and discussed the relative merits of indicators for coral reefs and other
ecosystems.
The Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop differed by its focus on integrating coral reef
monitoring across programs. To achieve integration, the workshop was organized around
assessment needs and assessment questions. This generated a collaborative brainstorming session
that explored alternative ways to compress a complex system into a small set of variables and
functions. The workshop was intended to determine the specific kinds of information needed to
address the most relevant management issues. Because the relevance of different information and
data often depends on perspective, the views of managers, scientists, residents and other
stakeholders were included in discussions of coral reef value, threats and sustainability.
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 5
-------
2.1 Seven steps toward integrated monitoring
In a facilitated process, the workshop participants moved through seven steps toward development
of an integrated monitoring program:
Step 1 - Establish a common vision
Step 2 - Identify management issues
Step 3 - Define monitoring objectives
Step 4 - Formulate assessment questions
Step 5 - Identify appropriate tools and measurements
Step 6 - Identify data needs and availability
Step 7 - Design the monitoring program
A discussion of each step and how the workshop participants addressed it is provided below.
Step 1 - Establish a common vision
The initial step in developing an integrated monitoring program is to identify a common vision for
relevant reef ecosystem and resource management issues. Many USVI initiatives are embodied in
the Coastal Zone Management Program, which indicates that sustainable development can be
achieved if there is a commitment to improve or maintain resource conditions in concert with
development initiatives. In 2001, the USVI territorial legislature convened an economic
development summit from which a draft sustainable development document was prepared. The
basic goals for USVI coastal zones (USVI 1978) were to:
1. Protect, maintain, preserve and, where feasible, enhance and restore, the overall quality of
the environment in the coastal zone, the natural and man-made resources therein, and the
scenic and historic resources of the coastal zone for the benefit of residents of and visitors
to the USVI;
2. Promote economic development and growth in the coastal zone and consider the need for
development of greater than territorial concern by managing: (a) the impacts of human
activity and (b) the use and development of renewable and nonrenewable resources so as
to maintain and enhance the long-term productivity of the coastal environment;
3. Assure priority for coastal-dependent development over other development in the coastal
zone by reserving areas suitable for commercial uses including hotels and related facilities,
industrial uses including port and marine facilities, and recreation uses;
4. Assure the orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of the resources of the coastal
zone, taking into account the social and economic needs of the residents of the USVI;
5. Preserve, protect and maintain the trust lands and other submerged and filled lands of the
USVI so as to promote the general welfare of the people of the USVI;
6. Preserve what has been a tradition and protect what has become a right of the public by
insuring that the public, individually and collectively, has and shall continue to have the
right to use and enjoy the shorelines and to maximize public access to and along the
shorelines consistent with constitutionally protected rights of private property owners;
6 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
7. Promote and provide affordable and diverse public recreational opportunities in the coastal
zone for all residents of the USVI through acquisition, development and restoration of areas
consistent with sound resource conservation principles;
8. Conserve ecologically significant resource areas for their contribution to marine productivity
and value as wildlife habitats, and preserve the function and integrity of reefs, marine
meadows, salt ponds, mangroves and other significant natural areas;
9. Maintain or increase coastal water quality through control of erosion, sedimentation,
runoff, siltation and sewage discharge;
10. Consolidate the existing regulatory controls applicable to uses of land and water in the
coastal zone into a single unified process consistent with the provisions of this chapter, and
coordinate therewith the various regulatory requirements of the United States
Government;
11. Promote public participation in decisions affecting coastal planning conservation and
development.
To build upon these goals, each USVI and Federal Agency in attendance gave a brief presentation
(Appendix F) to summarize the Agency's role in coral reef protection, the level of coral condition
needed by their Agency, the most critical threats to Agency interests, and the tools they were using
to protect or restore coral reefs (summarized in Table 2-1).
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 7
-------
Table 2-1. Summary of Agency information
Agency
Agency role
Geographic
purview
Key Drivers
and Pressures
How data is used
to support
Tools used Agency role
How a re
decisions
made
Local Managers
USVI Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR)
Division of
Coastal Zone
Management
(DCZM)
Division of
Environmental
Protection
• Manage,
enhance, protect,
and preserve
USVI coastal
resources, while
reducing conflict
between
competing land
and water uses
• CWA compliance
• Anchor and
grounding
response
• Acropora
recovery team
• Litigation of oil
spills
• USVI coastal
zone and East
End Marine Park
• 3 mile territorial
limit
• Coastal
development
• Land-based
sources of
pollution
• Sedimentation
• Discharges and
sewage bypass
• Oil spills
• Ship groundings
• Coastal zone
permitting
• USGS video benthic
protocol
• Reef fish survey
• Random coral reef
sampling
• Acropora monitoring
• Lobster monitoring
• NPS monitoring ~17
sites
• Education and
outreach
• Ambient and coral
reef monitoring
• Nearshore WQ
• Stormwater
management
• WQS
• 319 grants to address
nonpoint source
• BMPs to reduce
sediment
• TMDLs
• Working towards
biocriteria
• Earth change program
• NPS conference
• Ship grounding
strategy
• Acropora national
recovery team
• Education and
outreach
• Local action
strategies (LAS),
but waiting on
governor to sign
off
• TMDL
development
data
• Ambient WQ
monitoring
• WQS
• Effluent
limitations
• Permitting
• WQ based or
TMDL
conditions
• Determine
how to list for
303d list
• 305b
reporting
8 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-1 (continued)
Agency
Division of Fish
and Wildlife
(DFW)
Division of
Environmental
Enforcement1
Agency role
• Monitoring,
assessing and
implementing
public awareness
and other
activities that
help to enhance
and safeguard
fish and wildlife
resources
• Law enforcement
Geographic
purview
• USVI
• USVI
Key drivers
and pressures
• Anchor damage
• Coastal
development
• Commercial and
recreational
fishing
Tools used
• Mangrove
assessment
• Anchor damage
• Recreational fish
catch
• Boat moorings
• Habitat
enhancement
• Fish survey sites
• Education and
outreach
• Part of permit
review team
• Monthly commercial
catch reports
• Port samples
• Size, harvest and
bag limits
• Regulations on gear
• Boat and gear
marking
• Fishing licenses
• Trap inspection
• Fines and bans
How data is used
to support
Agency role
• Permit review for
coast develop-
ments and other
impacts
• Endangered spp
• Sea turtles
• Side scan sonar
• Commercial catch
offish and
lobster, conch,
whelk
• Education and
outreach
How a re
decisions
made
• Permit review
team
Federal A gencies
National Park Service
Virgin Islands
National Park,
St. John
• Park and its
natural resources
(including coral
reefs) are
maintained in
unimpaired
condition
(Organic Act)
• Park boundary
• Ship groundings
and anchor
damage
• Visitors
• Sedimentation
• Eutrophication
• Overfishing
• Inventory and
Monitoring Program
•Aquamap
• Coral cover
• Under water sonar
and repeat video
• Long term
temperature
monitoring
• Underwater
cameras of Acropora
• Evaluate MPA's
• Determine source
of damage to
coral
• Protect high
diversity hot spots
• T&E sites
• Whereto put
buoys and visitors
• Damage claims
• NEPA compliance
• Recommenda-
tions from
scientists
• Public
involvement
• NEPA
compliance
1 Agency not represented at the workshop
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 9
-------
Table 2-1 (continued)
Agency
Virgin Islands
Coral Reef
Monument
US EPA
USFWS
Agency role
• Park and its
natural resources
(including coral
reefs) are
maintained in
unimpaired
condition
(Organic Act)
• Resources
(including coral
reefs) are
maintained
unimpaired
(Organic Act)
• Implement and
enforce the CWA;
assist territory in
implementation;
provide research
to support
decision-making
• To protect
habitat for a
natural diversity
of plant and
wildlife, with an
emphasis on
threatened and
endangered
species
Geographic
purview
• Park boundary
•
• Park boundary
• All water bodies
within 3-mile
territorial limit
• Refuges in USVI
(Sandy Point,
Green Cay, Buck
Island-STJ)
Key drivers
and pressures
• Groundings,
anchors
• Visitors
• Sedimentation
• Eutrophication
• Overfishing
• Visitors
• Oil spills
• WW discharge
• Non-point
sources
• Contaminants
• Oil spills
Tools used
• Inventory and
Monitoring Program
•Aquamap
• Coral cover
• Under water sonar
and repeat video
• Long term
temperature
monitoring
• Underwater
cameras of Acropora
• Inventory and
Monitoring Program
• NOAA random
monitoring
• Cryptic species
monitoring
• TNCT&E
• WQS
• Discharge permitting
• NPS funding
• OSVBold
• Law enforcement
• Environmental
sensitivity atlas
• Section 10 and
Section 4
commenting
• ESA
• Recovery plans and
reviews
• Permit review
• CWA Section 4
permits
• CZM permits
• Habitat restoration
• Share ESA with
NOAA
• Federal aid to states
How data is used
to support
Agency role
• Evaluate MPA's
• Determine source
of damage to
rnrsl
\,\J\ Ql
• Protect high
diversity hot spots
• T&E sites
• Whereto put
buoys and visitors
• Damage claims
• NEPA compliance
• Efficacy of M PA
fish no take zone
• Protect ecosystem
services, refugia
• Track recovery of
fish
• Mitigate and ID
stressors
• Initiate long-term
monitoring
• Link biology to
decisions
• Permit decisions
• Link decision to
human
disturbance
• Section 7
consultations
How a re
decisions
made
• Recommenda-
tions from
scientists
• Public
involvement
• NEPA
compliance
• Recommenda-
tions from
scientists
• Public
involvement
• NEPA
compliance
• Permitting
• Comments on
coral reefs
routed thru DC
to US Coral
Reef Task
Force
10 I Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-1 (continued)
Agency
NOAA
Biogeography
Caribbean
Fishery
Management
Council and
NOAA NMFS1
Agency role
• Develop
information and
analytical
capabilities
through
rssssrcn,
monitoring, and
assessment on
the distribution
and ecology of
living marine
resources and
their associated
habitats for
improved
ecosystem
management
• Conservation and
orderly utilization
of the fishery
resources
Geographic
purview
• U.S. marine
waters
• U.S. Caribbean
EEZ
Key drivers
and pressures
• Land-based
sources of
pollution
• Fishing pressure
• Commercial and
recreational
fishing
Tools used
• Map
• Random sampling
• Ecosystem
perspective
• Fish counting &
benthos
• Size, harvest and bag
limits
• Seasonal closures
How data is used
to support
Agency role
• How fish MPA
closures support
production
• Relationships
between habitat,
coral and fish
• Quantify coral loss
due to groundings
• MPA closures
How a re
decisions
made
• Support other
agencies
• Use of EPA
WQ data
Academic Institutions
University of
the Virgin
Islands
• Education and
research
• Coral reef
monitoring at 5
sites/2x/yr.
'Agency not represented at the workshop
Step 2 - Identify management issues
Coral reef ecosystems face many environmental challenges from natural and anthropogenic
stressors. Maintaining reef condition at acceptable levels will require identifying, characterizing,
and reducing or mitigating effects of these stressors. A fundamental mandate for resource
management is to assess the value and condition of the reefs, anticipate the effects of existing and
future stresses and, if necessary, alter human activities to reduce and mitigate the stresses and
provide long-term sustainability. The services at stake, the severity of the stressors, the ability to
detect change, and management options can all influence priorities for coral reef protection and
conservation.
Identification of well-defined management issues is critical to the success of an integrated
ecological assessment. Once developed, these need to be translated into a set of specific
assessment questions that can be addressed scientifically. The assessment questions can be used
to select appropriate indicators, identify appropriate databases for use in assessment, and, if
needed, to develop a monitoring program.
The workshop participants identified management issues that threaten coral reefs surrounding
USVI (Table 2-2).
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 11
-------
Table 2-2. Management issues derived from discussions during the workshop and whether the
issue operates at a global, regional or local scale
Management issue
Fishing (commercial/recreational/subsistence)
Contaminants/pollutants
Physical damage (groundings, anchors)
Habitat loss/destruction/modification
Damage from tourists & divers
Hurricanes and storms
Lack of enforcement (capacity, will & authority)
Ballast water discharges
Elevated ocean temperature & acidification
Solid waste
Point sources
Sewage
Non-point sources
Debris
Sedimentation
African dust
Orinoco River plume
Coastal system degradation (mangroves, salt ponds, salt flats)
Scale
Global
X
X
X
Regional
X
X
X
Local
X
X
X
X
X
(x)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
This initial list included threats at the local, regional and global level. Although highly relevant and
of significant concern, some threats were outside the scope of what USVI managers can address,
e.g., global climate change and sediment derived from Saharan dust or the Orinoco River. Issues
that were primarily related to global and regional factors were set aside in order to focus on local
issues, which were aggregated into five categories (Table 2-3).
Table 2-3. Local management issues of concern for coral reefs in USVI grouped by topic
Management issues
Non-point source pollution
Sewage, sediments, contaminants/pollutants, agricultural uses, debris
Sustainable fisheries
Commercial, recreational, subsistence
Point source pollution
Rum distillery, oil refinery, sewage, ballast
Reef habitat destruction
Anchoring, groundings, construction, tourism
Coastal ecosystem destruction
Mangroves, salt ponds, salt flats
12 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Step 3 - Define monitoring objectives
Following identification of the management issues, it was essential to establish clearly stated
monitoring objectives (i.e., "What do we need to know?"). Without these objectives, monitoring
data may not address high-priority questions or may not adequately represent the overall status of
the resource.
Given the mission of DPNR Department of Environmental Protection, the charge to the workshop
participants was to articulate monitoring objectives applying verbs used in the U.S. CWA: Protect,
Enhance, Restore, and Maintain. The workshop participants developed monitoring objectives for
each management issue of concern.
Non-Point Source Pollution Monitoring Objectives
• Reduce nutrient loading from sewage, septic, agriculture, and feral animals/boat waste
• Protect coral reefs from effects of nutrients
• Enhance construction site Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to reduce sediment
loading on reefs
• Protect coral reefs from sedimentation damage
• Protect coral reefs and humans from bacteria
Point Source Pollution Monitoring Objectives
• Maintain Water Quality Standards (WQS) by regulating point source discharges
• Enhance National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Standards (NPDES) enforcement to protect
the coral reef resource.
• Enhance enforcement of vessel discharge rules (ballast water, thermal, hydrocarbon/chemical,
grey water, treated black water)
Reef Habitat Destruction Monitoring Objectives
• Protect desirable species
• Protect reefs from impacts of fishing gear
• Maintain ecosystem integrity
• Restore damaged habitat
• Protect coral colonized hard bottom and coral reefs, mangroves and seagrass beds
• Maintain ecosystem integrity, trophic structure, complexity, habitat structure, native species
richness
• Protect threatened and endangered species
• Maintain the physical and chemical conditions coral require
• Protect reefs from physical damage
• Enhance application of designated uses (e.g., propagation of desirable species)
• Enhance public understanding and valuation
Sustainable Fisheries (fishes, shellfish, invertebrates, turtles) Monitoring Objectives
• Maintain native fish community
• Restore trophic complexity (herbivores, large predators)
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 13
-------
• Maintain population/age structure
• Protect spawning, nursery areas
• Protect threatened and endangered species
• Maintain connectivity between critical habitats
• Enhance enforcement of fisheries regulations
• Enhance voluntary compliance of sustainable fisheries practices
• Maintain effectiveness of enforcement and voluntary programs
• Protect reef organisms from by-catch and gear impacts
• Enhance international cooperation
Coastal Ecosystem Destruction Objectives (Salt Ponds only, did not have time to address
mangroves and salt flats during the workshop)
• Restore ecological functions and services
• Protect wildlife use
• Maintain/restore sediment and nutrient filtering capacity
Further refinement of the monitoring objectives is to be expected. The above descriptions simply
reflect ideas generated during the workshop.
Step 4 - Formulate assessment questions
Evidence-based policy requires that researchers provide answers to ecological questions that are of
interest to policy makers. While scientists are frequently more interested in specific questions and
greater detail, broad issues drive policy makers. Nonetheless, management issues can be translated
into specific assessment questions that guide the design of scientific and monitoring programs.
Assessment questions link management issues to a scientific query with a potential management
outcome. Indicators, monitoring designs, databases, and investigative research are all specifically
designed to address the assessment questions.
The questions most commonly asked are:
• How are our coral reefs doing? (Status)
• Are they getting better or worse? (Trends)
• What is/are causing the problems? (Diagnosis)
• What can we do about it? (Management)
• Are our management programs making a difference? (Performance)
While it may be challenging to answer these questions effectively, USVI and EPA are committed to
an open and collaborative process to generate a question-driven assessment. Specific actions and
policies are not prescribed because it is rare to have definitive knowledge or a comprehensive
understanding of the scientific and technical dimensions of a management issue. The selection
of assessment questions and the process used to develop them are critical to the design of a
comprehensive monitoring program. Preliminary assessment questions were developed for many
monitoring objectives through an interactive and iterative process (Table 2-4). However, time
constraints precluded development of assessment questions for all monitoring objectives during
the workshop.
14 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-4. Preliminary assessment questions developed during the workshop
Management issues
Non-point source
pollution
Monitoring objectives
Reduce nutrient loading
from:
- sewage
- septic
-agriculture
-feral animals
- boat waste
• Protect coral reefs from
effects of nutrients
• Enhance construction site
BMPs in order to reduce
sediment loading on reefs
• Protect coral reefs from
sedimentation damage
• Protect coral reefs and
humans from bacteria
Assessment questions
• What % of homes are on public systems?
• What % of sewers/septic/overflows are failing?
• What sewer systems are working? What %?
• Discharge monitoring requirements
• Inflow & infiltration
• Ambient quarterly samples (130 fixed station; bacteria)
• Beach monitoring weekly (targeted; 43 stations @ 41 beaches)
• GIS layer - septic systems overlaid with soil types/slope to determine
appropriate areas
• Where are sewage and agricultural nutrient loads coming from? (Locations)
• Land use maps
• Run-off coefficients (to the sea)
• Non-compliance reports (bi-passes)
• National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) surveys?
• How much sewage/animal waste is reaching the coastal environment?
• What is the relative load from waste streams?
• What is the total load?
• How much does the sewage increase during storm events?
• What are the pollutants of concern in the sewage release?
• How much fertilizer do farmers use? Homeowners?
• What % are running off?
• How much boat waste is dumped?
• Do the current nutrient standards protect coral reefs?
• How much are coral reefs affected by nutrients? (CSOs, septics, agriculture,
feral animals)
• What are the relevant effects?
• What is the extent and location of macro algae? (Missing grazers)
• What is the light attenuation in reef water?
• What is the sediment-loading rate?
• What are the relative contributions from different types?
• What are the sources of sediment loads?
• What is the importance of storm events?
• How much sedimentation can corals take?
• Physical deposition
• Shifting sand
• Photosynthesis
• What is the relative impact of each of the above?
• What particle sizes are important?
• Can corals recover?
• How long does it take?
• Is there a relationship between mangroves, salt ponds and coral reef condition
related to sediment?
• Do vegetated buffers provide protection from sedimentation? How much?
• How does sedimentation affect other species?
• Fish
• Worms
• Bivalves
• Are enteric viruses reaching reefs?
• Is there an effect?
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 15
-------
Table 2-4 (continued)
Management issues
Point source pollution
Habitat alteration and
loss
Monitoring objectives
• Maintain WQS by
regulating point source
discharges
• Enhance NPDES
enforcement to protect
the coral reef resource
• Monitor vessel discharges
(ballast water, thermal,
hydrocarbon/chemical,
grey water, treated black
water) to protect coral
reefs
• Maintain ecosystem
integrity
• Protect desirable species
• Protect reefs from impacts
of fishing gear
• Restore damaged habitat
• Protect coral colonized
hard bottom and coral
reefs, mangroves and
seagrass beds
• Maintain ecosystem
integrity, trophic
structure, complexity,
habitat structure, native
species richness
• Protect threatened and
endangered species
• Maintain physical,
chemical conditions coral
require
• Protect reefs from
physical damage
Assessment questions
• Are the monitoring methods sufficient to ensure the WQS are supported?
• Do the WQS protect the resources?
• What are the point sources?
• Where are they located?
• What are the pollutants of concern?
• How much of each?
• Are the current mechanisms effective in protecting the resource? (NPDES)
• Are the penalties directly applied to protect the resource?
• Are point sources affecting coral reefs?
• What are the point sources?
• What is being discharged?
• What is the aerial extent of impact?
• What is the temporal extent of impact?
• Does a chemical load have more impact than a sediment load?
(e.g. what type of point source)
• What is the type and extent of discharge? (Load & distance)
• What are the specific and cumulative effects?
• At what proximity does it have an effect? (What is the "safe" distance?)
• Are there aquatic nuisance species of concern in the ballast?
• How long does it take to recover from a discharge?
• What is extent of habitat? Seagrass, mangroves, living coral, hard bottom
• Which habitat type(s) supports T&E and desired species?
• How much habitat loss before fish populations decline?
• What adverse impacts affect habitat?
• How measure ecosystem integrity? Possible without coral?
• What are expectations of minimally disturbed or reference locations?
• What is resilience of framework coral?
• Where are framework coral? (e.g. T&E)
• What areas are protected?
• Do designated uses protect habitat? And propagate desirable species?
• Do different habitat types vary by cultural or aesthetic values?
• How do coral and fish species differ by topography?
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
16 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-4 (continued)
Management issues
Sustainable fisheries
(fishes, shellfish,
invertebrates, turtles)
Monitoring objectives
• Enhance application of
designated uses (e.g.
propagation of desirable
species)
• Enhance public
understanding and
valuation
• Maintain native fish
community
• Restore trophic
complexity (herbivores,
large predators)
• Maintain population/age
structure
• Protect spawning and
nursery areas
• Protect threatened and
endangered species
Assessment questions
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• How much fish? (biomass)
• How many fish?
• What is fishing effort and gear? (What amount of damage?)
• What is species composition?
• How do trophic structure, composition, biomass, fishing pressure, and age
structure change overtime?
• What are target species? Shift in target? What are they catching?
• Areas of high fish pressure, locations
• What are expectations for trophic structure, composition, biomass, fishing
pressure, and age structure?
• What is by catch, by gear type?
• What are recommendations and observations of local fisheries advisory
committees, fisheries associations, etc.?
• What are marine protected areas?
• Are they successfully operating to protect fish?
• What % are no-take?
• What areas have T&E protected?
• Are there areas closed to fishing?
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• Where are the critical spawning and nursery areas? (Type and aerial extent)
• What species are associated with each spawning area?
• Which spawning areas are used by protected species?
• Are critical spawning areas within MPAs?
• When are the critical spawning and nursery times?
• Which species are associated with each spawning time?
• What is the condition of the critical spawning and nursery areas?
• What is the habitat in these critical spawning areas?
• What attributes of the habitat support spawning?
• What habitats are sensitive to human use?
• How do human uses affect the habitat?
• What habitats are affected by natural factors and global climate change?
(Ocean acidification, sea level, temperature, chlorophyll fronts, etc.)
• Which spawning and nursery areas are at risk (vulnerable)?
• Which spawning area(s)/species combination(s) are at risk?
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 17
-------
Table 2-4 (continued)
Management issues
Coastal ecosystem
destruction - mangroves
Coastal ecosystem
destruction - salt ponds
Coastal ecosystem
destruction - salt flats
Monitoring objectives
• Maintain connectivity
between critical habitats
• Enhance enforcement of
fisheries regulations
• Enhance voluntary
compliance of sustainable
fisheries practices
• Maintain effectiveness of
enforcement and
voluntary programs
• Protect reef organisms
from by-catch and gear
impacts
• Enhance international
cooperation
• No management objective
development during
workshop
• Restore salt ponds to
ecological functions and
services (according to
ecological type)
• Protect wildlife use
• Maintain/restore
sediment filtering capacity
• No management objective
development during
workshop
Assessment questions
• Can coral reefs recover? How fast?
• What shape, types, etc. of coral are found in areas used by fish? (Size
heterogeneity, bottom shape)
• What coral "type" in nursery areas?
• What aspects of coral reefs support fish? Living?
• What area of hard bottom? What is covered by living coral cover, algae, dead
coral, coralline algae?
• How abundant are invertebrate herbivores (diadema)?
• What difference to lobsters, fish, whelks between live and dead coral or
structure?
• What size of space supports fish species?
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
• No assessment questions developed during workshop for this objective
Step 5 - Identify appropriate tools and measurements
As natural resource agencies move toward more integrated monitoring, an early realization is that
there are many ways of measuring environmental condition. Hershner et al. (2007) recommended
that a distinction be made between measurements and indicators: "indicators are intended to
convey more information than a simple measurement of a system component"; indicators imply
"something more about the system than the status of one parameter." Measurement methods can
generate conflicts for an integrated monitoring program. Even when scientists agree and measure
the same biological endpoint (e.g., coral cover), they might use different methods (e.g., quadrats
vs. transects, or physical measures vs. video), and data may not be comparable.
An example illustrates the next step of the process. Many assessment questions generated during
this workshop were related to coral reefs and how they support sustainable fisheries. A monitoring
objective for this: "Maintain native fish community" was selected as a demonstration (Table 2-5).
18 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-5. Assessment questions, tools and measurements, data needs and availability, and type
of sampling design needed to answer the question for a single management issue ("Sustainable
fisheries") and a single monitoring objective ("Maintain native fish community")
Assessment questions
What is the extent of coral reef?
What is correlation between fish
species and abundance and coral
surface area?
What attributes of corals support
fisheries? (spawning, nurseries,
refugia)
Are particular coral spp. more
valuable to fish spp. and
abundance? What is their extent?
Are they changing?
What % of coral habitat in "good"
condition for fisheries?
Are fishery-supporting attributes
of stony corals changing? How
fast? Where?
What is causing the change?
Does it relate to stressor
patterns?
Tools and measurements
• Satellite imagery
• Site visits
• Coral: rugosity, density, species
composition, surface area, colony
morphology, coral condition
• Fish: species abundance, biomass, trophic
role
• Coral: species composition, surface area,
density, living tissue, colony morphology
• Fish: species abundance, biomass
• Location of spawning, nursery, and
refugia for fish
• Coral: species composition, surface area,
colony morphology
• Fish: species abundance, biomass, trophic
role
• Index of coral condition incorporating
measures at multiple level of biological
complexity (e.g., colony, species,
assemblage)
• Satellite imagery
• Underwater measures of coral surface
area, extent, density, species
composition, living tissue
• Land use/land cover information
• Pollution source locations
• Underwater measures of coral condition
(extent, density, species composition,
living tissue, etc.)
Data needs and availability
• NOAA benthic habitat maps
available for USVI
• Accuracy field tested
• Partially answered
• Fish presence correlated with
complex topography and coral
•Unknown
•Unknown
•Unknown
• Answered for some targeted
locations
• Partially answered: Loss of
coral associated with human
land use on the south side of
St. Croix
Type of design
• Census and
probabilistic
• Targeted and
probabilistic
• Targeted and
probabilistic
• Targeted and
probabilistic
• Probabilistic
status
• Probabilistic
trend
• Targeted or
status
Examining the list of assessment questions related to coral support of the fisheries, a similar set of
coral measurements emerge: identification of coral species present, density of coral colonies, coral
condition (% living tissue, % diseased or bleached), surface area, and structural complexity. This
type of assessment of coral condition is highly relevant for answering numerous questions related
to the support of sustainable fisheries, and EPA has developed a rapid bioassessment protocol
(RBP) for stony corals that collects this type of data (Fisher 2007). EPA subsequently evaluated the
metrics collected using the RBP for their statistical precision and ability to detect change over time
(Foreetal. 2006 [a and b]).
Looking back at the larger list of all monitoring objectives, data that describe coral species
composition, condition, and colony size would also be relevant to monitoring objectives related to
non-point source pollution (e.g., evaluating the effects of sediment, nutrients, vessel groundings
and best management practices for construction), point source pollution (e.g., developing water
quality standards for point sources, and evaluating the effects of ship ballast discharge), and
habitat alteration and loss (e.g., protection of desirable species, protection of threatened and
endangered species, and support of designated uses). This type of information, then, appears to be
useful for many management objectives.
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 19
-------
More recently, additional methods have been developed for fish, octocorals, sponges and macro-
invertebrates (Santavy et al. 2012). In this multi-assemblage survey approach, fish and macro-
invertebrates are assessed for fisheries potential, and stony corals, octocorals and sponges are
assessed for habitat provision, potential natural products discovery and shoreline protection. All
assemblages contribute to tourism potential and all are incorporated into ranking of reef
ecosystem condition.
In addition, NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program has developed standardized monitoring
protocols for benthic communities (including corals), reef-associated fish communities, climate
change (thermal stress and ocean acidification) and human dimensions related to perceptions of,
and interactions with, coral reef ecosystems (NOAA 2014).
Selecting indicators
During the process to develop an assessment framework, most people quickly recognize a need for
prioritizing assessment questions according to need, cost and logistics. Monitoring tools and
measurements that provide information to answer more, or more important, assessment questions
may be assigned a higher priority. Some assessment questions may require a unique set of data
collection methods, but the information needed is so fundamental that the question trumps all
others in importance. "What is the extent of coral reef?" is an example of this type of assessment
question.
Before an integrated monitoring program can be implemented, some method must be derived to
select the most appropriate indicators of environmental condition. EPA has published a guidance
document (Jackson et al. 2000) to evaluate ecological indicators in four sequential phases:
conceptual foundation, feasibility of implementation, response variability and interpretation and
utility. Wardrop et al. (2007) recommend evaluating indicators in terms of 1) the types of questions
that they answer (e.g., condition assessment, stressor diagnosis, communication to the public,
future condition, and management effectiveness); 2) the spatial and temporal scale at which the
indicator operates; and 3) the type of human land use within which they are relevant (Figure 2-1).
The spatial scale of interest for this measure is the nearshore waters surrounding USVI. Because
extent will not change quickly, the temporal scale of interest is a decade or longer. Coral
communities are likely to be responsive in the short term (months) and longer periods (years) but
are less likely to show seasonal effects. The spatial scale is the near-shore area around the island
where coral reefs naturally occur.
Social context sets expectations for resource condition. If an area is used for navigation and
commercial shipping, the same level of coral condition and fisheries may not be expected as for a
park or other protected area.
20 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
A) Extent of coral reef
Assess
condition
What is the type of question (indicator)7
Evaluate
performance
Diagnose
stressor
Forecast
condition
What is the spatial/temporal scale of interest?
Days Months
What is the social context (land/sea use)?
B) Rapid bioassessment protocol for stony corals
What is the type of question (indicator) ?
,--—-
'Ommunicate
Diagnose
stressor
What is the spatial/temporal scale of interest?
What is the social context (land/sea use) ?
nc.isv al
Figure 2-1. Framework to compare indicators. The comparison is based on the type of questions
they address, the spatial and temporal scale of questions they can answer, and the social context
or land use within which we intend to compare indicator values. The framework is shown for two
indicators: A) extent of coral and B) coral condition derived from the RBP for stony coral.
Organizing within this framework, the extent of coral reef within USVI waters can be used to
answer questions about resource condition and to communicate to the public and stakeholders.
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 21
-------
Step 6 - Identify data needs and availability
The scientific literature related to coral reef biology is vast and can be challenging both to interpret
and to apply within the context of resource management. Nonetheless, many of the questions
asked by a coral reef resource manager are perennial and may have been satisfactorily addressed
by previous studies. When this is true, results from other studies can simply be documented and
local resources may be profitably applied to other unanswered questions. Identifying data needs
and data availability constitute an important step in the process that can reduce redundancy and
improve efficiency.
As an example for USVI, the relationship between the structural complexity of coral reef habitat
and fish diversity has been well documented (Pittman et al. 2007). Data from NOAA benthic maps
along with underwater fish surveys and measures of coral rugosity collected by divers have shown
that fish prefer topographically complex habitats. The many fish surveys from USVI and Puerto Rico
provide ample data to document this relationship. In contrast, questions about which species or
what types of coral are most important to fish remain to be answered. In the course of ranking
assessment questions and allocating funds for monitoring, a brief literature review or simple survey
of local experts can ascertain whether new data are actually needed to answer an assessment
question.
Step 7 - Design the monitoring program
Regional bioassessment programs typically include three types of sampling approaches. Data are
collected to 1) assess the current status of a resource, 2) detect trends in resource condition over
time, and 3) evaluate effectiveness of management actions at specific (targeted) locations. Status,
trend, and targeted sampling all differ in the manner in which sampling units (e.g., reef stations)
are selected from among the total population of sampling units.
• Status assessment is best accomplished with random selection of sampling locations
every year.
• The best sampling designs for detecting trends initially select sampling locations randomly, but
then re-visit the same locations in subsequent years.
• For targeted sampling, locations are selected based on specific criteria, such as sites with best
management practices in place or sites with known sources of disturbance.
These issues were introduced and discussed for USVI in Fore et al. 2006(a) and more generally at
the EPA Aquatic Resource Monitoring Website (URL:
http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/arm/designpages/design&a nalysis.htm).
Status, trend, and targeted monitoring designs are intended to answer different types of questions
(Table 2-6). There is no single "right" design that will answer all monitoring questions for a resource
because every indicator cannot be measured at every location. For example, regional sampling
within the waters of Buck Island National Monument has been extensive and long-term, and was
designed to address the specific questions of the park managers. However, this data cannot be
used to describe other segments of the USVI coastline that were not included in the survey design.
22 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table 2-6. Comparison of the monitoring approach and the sampling design used to answer the
five main monitoring questions
Question
How big is the problem?
Is the problem getting
better or worse?
What's causing the
problem?
What can we do?
Are we helping?
Monitoring approach
• Predict which waters may be impaired
• Evaluate status of resource in effected area
• Determine whether sites support designated uses
• Determine % of waters that meet water quality
standards
• Identify sensitive measures
• Determine time frame of change
• Identify likely stressors
• Experiments to compare stressor effects
• Develop dose/response relationships
• Monitor near discharge points and point-sources
• Evaluate effectiveness of treatment (local scale)
• Evaluate status of resource in effected area
(regional scale)
• Determine % of waters meet water quality
standards
Sampling design
• Probabilistic survey for status
• Probabilistic trend with repeat visits to
randomly selected sites
• Targeted sampling in problem areas or
probabilistic survey
• Targeted sampling in problem areas
• Status, trend or targeted
As an example, characterizing the spatial extent of coral reefs might require two different sampling
methods. A census design would be used to identify all habitat types using satellite imagery. In
contrast, a random design would be used to evaluate the accuracy of the maps using diver
observations.
To characterize relationships between coral and fish assemblages, either probabilistic or targeted
sampling could be used. Targeted sampling would likely be more efficient to address this question
because reef stations can be handpicked to test specific hypotheses. Nonetheless, the relationships
between coral and fish condition could also be derived from probabilistic sampling if enough
locations were visited.
Assessment questions related to change such as, "Are fisheries-supporting attributes of corals
changing?" indicate a need for repeated measurements through time. The best design randomly
selects reef stations for the first year of sampling so that results can be generalized to the entire
population of reef areas, even those not visited. If the same sites are sampled and compared
through time, a smaller change in reef or fish condition can be detected because each reef station
is compared to itself.
2.2 Case examples
Several example cases are provided below:
Example Case 1: What is the status of coral reefs in USVI?
• Description: Before we can manage or protect coral reefs, something about the condition and
location should be known. Areas that support exceptional coral reefs require different
management plans than areas without reefs.
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 23
-------
• Statistical sampling design: Probabilistic sampling provides an unbiased assessment of coral
reef condition at a regional scale. Random site selection also provides an estimate of
uncertainty, e.g., expressed as a confidence interval around estimates of coral cover or fish
taxa richness.
o The survey design may be selective and need not include all near-shore areas. If
coral reefs are the focus of the study, only hard bottom (coral reef substrate) habitat
would be sampled.
• Statistical analysis: A probabilistic survey design yields estimates of the indicators measured
for the entire region sampled. For example, fish abundance or coral cover could be reported
along with confidence limits for the estimates. Indicator values for different regions could be
compared and areas of greatest value or at greatest risk could be identified.
• Program support: This type of sampling is recommended to fulfill CWA 305(b) reporting
requirements.
Example Case 2: Is coral reef condition getting better or worse?
• Description: Local reports of coral reef decline can be effective catalysts for more widespread
assessment and protection, but to determine if the observed changes are truly representative,
sites throughout the region must be assessed. Trend monitoring is designed to provide
objective answers about changes in coral reef condition throughout the region.
• Statistical sampling design: Initial site selection is random and subsequent sampling returns to
the same locations. Initial random selection means that the results apply to all coral reefs
within the sampled area. Return to the same sites insures that the smallest change in reef
condition can be detected because each site is compared directly to itself through time.
• Statistical analysis: The statistical test for trend using this design is a paired test. For two
different sampling events, indicator values are compared for each site. A consistent difference,
e.g., lower coral cover in the later year, would indicate a regional decline in reef condition. For
multiple years, regression could be used and a significant slope would indicate a change in reef
condition for the region.
• Program support: Trend monitoring also supports CWA 305b reporting. A decline in resource
condition indicates a need for additional diagnosis of what may be causing the problem.
Example Case 3: What is causing decline in reef condition?
• Description: Coral reefs are sensitive to a variety of changes associated with human uses. In
order for management actions to be effective, we must identify which human activities
degrade coral reefs and how the damage is inflicted. Loss of coral cover may be higher in areas
closer to urban development, but further analysis is needed to determine if sedimentation,
toxic effluent, or nutrient enrichment represents the greatest threat to coral reefs.
• Statistical sampling design: Multiple approaches are possible. If status monitoring has been
extensive (e.g., > 50 sites) and data related to site condition have also been collected,
relationships between stressors and indicators can be tested. If existing data are insufficient,
gradients of human disturbance can be developed. To do this, sites would be selected to
represent a range of exposures, while controlling for other natural factors.
• Statistical analysis: Correlation tests are conducted for an association between stressors and
indicators of coral reef condition.
24 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
• Program support: Diagnosis of causes supports the development of local "best management
practices" to reduce human activities that degrade coral reefs. If sediment is the greatest
threat, then land use permitting on steep slopes could be strengthened to provide greater
protection and zoning rules could be used to encourage development on level terrain.
Example Case 4: Are management programs making a difference?
• Description: When a resource protection agency asks businesses to change how they work,
the agency is often challenged. The regulated community is more likely to implement changes
if the action has been demonstrated to be effective. If sediment is harming coral reefs,
different sediment abatement methods should be tested and compared to determine what
types of practices will be effective.
• Statistical sampling design: At a regional scale, detecting a change in coral reef condition from
management actions is challenging because of confounding factors. For example, as one
human activity is successfully managed, new activities arise. Therefore, a smaller scale design
is better suited for testing the effectiveness of a specific management action. For example,
sites with and without best management practices in place could be compared.
• Statistical analysis: Coral indicators at different locations can be compared with a two-sample
test. In many situations the temptation will be to evaluate effectiveness based on a surrogate
of coral reef condition, particularly given the length of time that may be needed to document
a change in coral reef condition. For example, a comparison of suspended sediment may be
used in place of a measure of coral cover to evaluate whether the management action was
effective in reducing sediment. But this type of substitution should be applied cautiously
because the endpoint of concern is coral reef condition, not sediment reduction.
• Program support: Effectiveness monitoring demonstrates whether management actions
protect coral reefs. Stakeholders and the regulated community are more likely to support
programs that achieve the goals. Local support, in turn, strengthens the political will to
implement additional monitoring and protection programs.
2.3 Monitoring for biocriteria water quality standards
DPNR initiated a process under the aegis of the CWA to develop scientifically defensible coral reef
biocriteria. In 2006 EPA, in collaboration with DPNR sampled 59 targeted sites around St. Croix.
Sites were located near sources of human disturbance to test sensitivity of coral indicators and
evaluate field protocols. In December 2007, a probabilistic (random) survey was conducted to
assess coral condition around St. Croix. In February 2009, a similar survey was completed around
St. Thomas and St. John. These two studies represent the first regional assessment of coral reefs in
USVI, establishing a benchmark for future surveys (Fisher et al. 2014).
The ultimate goal of these joint EPA/ DPNR efforts was to establish a long-term monitoring strategy
in the USVI that could be linked to CWA tools such as biocriteria (Bradley et al. 2010). The proposed
monitoring design (Table 2-7) provided coverage across USVI's coastal management zones and
adopted a rotating panel approach that provided both status and trend monitoring while allowing
some flexibility for targeted monitoring to address specific jurisdiction questions (Fore et al. 2006a
and b). The rotating panel is designed with fewer sampling stations in the fifth year to allow for
data compilation and reporting.
Chapter 2. Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop | 25
-------
Table 2-7. Proposed long-term monitoring strategy for USVI (Fore et al. 2006a)
Year
East St. Croix
West St. Croix
St. Thomas
St. John
Targeted
Total
1
10 trend
40 status
10
60
2
10 trend
30 status
10
50
3
10 trend
40 status
10
60
4
10 trend
30 status
20
60
5
40
40
26 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Chapter 3. Summary and Lessons Learned
3.1 Lessons learned
In September 2007, the EPA and USVI DPNR held a workshop in St. Croix, USVI to initiate a
process to design an integrated monitoring program capable of meeting multiple management
objectives.
The workshop objectives were to:
• Identify existing efforts to build from
o Prior workshops
o Monitoring and assessment activities
• Characterize agency regulatory and management questions that require resource
monitoring
• Begin the process of designing a monitoring program to meet multiple management
objectives
The following key points were gained from large and small group discussions:
• USVI cares about its coral reefs. There are numerous programs, both governmental and
non-governmental, to study and protect coral reefs in USVI. Agencies have formed
partnerships to conduct coral reef monitoring, assessment and management in the USVI
marine protected areas (e.g., the National Parks and East End Marine Park).
• Management issues that threaten coral reefs surrounding USVI include threats at the local,
regional and global level. Many of the issues were local, and many have regulatory
programs specifically intended to address them.
• There is a long history of coral reef monitoring in USVI, most of which employed a targeted
sampling approach to answer specific questions about coral reef ecology. However, a
probabilistic sampling approach is needed to provide estimates of regional status and
trends that can be used in management decisions.
• A core set of coral measurements began to emerge during discussions: identification of the
coral species present, density of coral colonies, coral condition (% live, % diseased or
bleached), coral surface area and structural complexity. Core measurements for other
assemblages (e.g., fish, gorgonians and macroinvertebrates) could also be identified since
many agencies already have monitoring protocols for these.
• Biological criteria can contribute to the public understanding of the biological health and
integrity of USVI's water bodies.
• Research is needed to: 1) understand the connections between human activities, the
resultant stressors (e.g., sedimentation) and coral vulnerability to bleaching and disease;
2) understand how the loss of coral will affect fishes and other reef organisms; and
3) evaluate the potential role of MPAs and other management actions in reversing
degradation of coral reefs and reef fish populations.
Chapter 3. Summary and Lessons Learned | 27
-------
3.2 Next steps
Support the assessment question framework with additional workshops
This workshop addressed preliminary steps for developing an integrated monitoring program.
The shared vision for coral reefs was adopted from existing documents describing how USVI's
natural resources will be developed according to principles of sustainability. During the
workshop, participants identified a fairly complete list of management issues and monitoring
objectives, but the assessment questions were only partially completed. This document
provides examples for next steps in the process, including identification of appropriate tools
and measurements, identification of data needs and availability, and selection of an
appropriate monitoring design. To advance the assessment question process toward the
realization of integrated monitoring, additional workshops and regional cooperation will be
needed.
Engage other stakeholders in the discussion of monitoring and assessment
needs to protect coral reefs
Long-term monitoring programs require long-term commitment by many people in multiple
agencies. Once managers have reached consensus on management issues, monitoring
objectives, and assessment questions, it is recommended that USVI invite the other
stakeholders to participate in the process. Other stakeholders would include other government
managers who make decisions that impact the reef (planners, engineers, etc.), non-
governmental organizations, landowners, and reef-related industries (e.g., tourism, recreational
and commercial fishing, diving and snorkeling, aquarium fish collecting).
Along with the environmental managers and scientists, residents of the jurisdiction also have a
stake in sustained services from coral reef ecosystems (e.g., fish habitat, tourism, aesthetics,
shoreline protection, bio-mining, construction material, and ecological considerations such as
biodiversity and primary production). It is central to the ecosystem approach that members of
the community (residents, landowners, fishers, farmers, businessmen, resource managers and
particularly civil representatives and elected officials) recognize the current and future value of
these services. USVI should convene open meetings and facilitated workshops to identify
stakeholder perspectives and openly discuss the value of coral reefs to the various sectors of
USVI society.
Since the workshop, Pittman et al. (2012) published a comprehensive report that provides a
synthesis of marine monitoring activities in the nearshore waters of the USVI from 1990-2009.
The report provides summary metadata that describe the monitoring programs, their
implementing agency, and the ecosystem components that are measured together with maps
showing where the measurements were taken. The report is intended to facilitate data sharing
and synergies between monitoring programs, inform and enhance strategic planning for
regional and national monitoring, avoid duplication of effort and increase knowledge and
awareness of the spatial, temporal and compositional characteristics of monitoring in the USVI.
28 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
In 2010 NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program began developing a National Coral Reef
Monitoring Plan (NCRMP). The four primary goals of NCRMP are:
• Monitor the status and trends of coral reef ecosystems (including human communities),
• Monitor and assess climate-related threats to coral reefs,
• Provide a consistent flow of data and information to communities in coral reef
jurisdictions, and
• Foster partnerships to expand the scope and scale of coral reef monitoring.
In 2013, NOAA conducted an NCRMP pilot study in USVI using a stratified random sampling
design throughout shallow water coral reefs (0-30m). NOAA and partners (UVI, NPS, University
of Miami, TNC and USVI DPNR) monitored coral cover, coral community structure, rigidity,
prevalence of bleaching, and associated measures of fish community structure (abundance,
diversity, size, etc.). NOAA released the final NCRMP guidance in 2014 (NOAA 2014).
Establish a coastal data partnership
Although on the agenda for Day 2, data management was not discussed during the workshop.
Coastal data partnerships can lead to a better understanding of environmental issues and may
enable better management decisions (Hale et al. 2003). This workshop has demonstrated that
USVI coral reef managers have a common need for shared data. A coastal data partnership,
with strong collaborative leadership, committed partners willing to invest in the partnership,
and clear agreements on data standards and data policy would make it easier to exchange and
integrate data.
Work to ensure that water quality standards for USVI's near-shore waters
match the water quality goals of the stakeholders
In 2001, the National Research Council published a report called Assessing the TMDL Approach
to Water Quality Management (NRC 2001). They found that the CWA's broad goals related to
"fishable" and "swimmable" waters were not specific enough to provide the operational
definition of designated uses, and recommended greater specificity in defining aquatic life uses.
USVI has revised its water quality standards to incorporate the use of biocriteria in water
quality reporting: "The Territory shall preserve, protect, and restore water resources to their
most natural condition. The condition of these waterbodies shall be determined from measures
of physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of each waterbody class, according to its
designated use. As a component of these measures, the Territory may consider the biological
integrity of the benthic communities living within waters. These communities shall be assessed
by comparison to reference conditions(s) with similar abiotic and biotic environmental settings
that represent the optimal or least disturbed condition for that system. Such reference
conditions shall be those observed to support the greatest community diversity, and abundance
of aquatic life as is expected to be or has been historically found in natural settings essentially
undisturbed or minimally disturbed by human impacts, development, or discharges. This
condition shall be determined by consistent sampling and reliable measures of selected
indicator communities of flora and/or fauna and may be used in conjunction with other
measures of water quality. Waters shall be of a sufficient quality to support a resident biological
community as defined by metrics based upon reference conditions. These narrative biological
Chapter 3. Summary and Lessons Learned | 29
-------
criteria shall apply to fresh water, wetlands, estuarine, mangrove, seagrass, coral reef and other
marine ecosystems based upon their respective reference conditions and metrics" (USVI 2010).
USVI has also incorporated more specific language for their designated uses:
§ 186-2. Class A
• (a) Best usage of waters: Preservation of natural phenomena requiring special
conditions, such as the Natural Barrier Reef at Buck Island, St. Croix, and the Under
Water Trail at Trunk Bay, St. John. These are outstanding natural resource waters that
cannot be altered except towards natural conditions. No new or increased
dischargers shall be permitted.
• (b) Quality criteria: Existing natural conditions shall not be changed. The biological
condition shall be similar or equivalent to reference condition for biological integrity.
In no case shall Class B water quality standards be exceeded.
§ 186-3. Class B
• (a) Best usage of waters: For maintenance and propagation of desirable species of
aquatic life (including threatened, endangered species listed pursuant to section 4 of
the federal Endangered Species Act and threatened, endangered and indigenous
species listed pursuant Title 12, Chapter 2 of the Virgin Islands Code) and for primary
contact recreation (swimming, water skiing, etc.). This Class allows minimal changes
in structure of the biotic community and minimal changes in ecosystem function.
Virtually all native taxa are maintained with some changes in biomass and/or
abundance; ecosystem functions are fully maintained within the range of natural
variability.
• (b) Quality criteria: The biological condition shall reflect no more than a minimal
departure from reference condition for biological integrity. The following criteria
apply at and beyond the boundary of the applicable mixing zone as specified in
section 186-5(f) or 186-6, as the case may be.
§ 186-4. Class C
• (a) Best usage of waters: For maintenance and propagation of desirable species of
aquatic life (including threatened and endangered species listed pursuant to section 4
of the federal Endangered Species Act and threatened, endangered and indigenous
species listed pursuant Title 12, Chapter 2 of the Virgin Islands Code) and for primary
contact recreation (swimming, water skiing, etc.). This Class allows for evident
changes in structure of the biotic community and minimal changes in ecosystem
function. Evident changes in structure due to loss of some rare native taxa; shifts in
relative abundance of taxa (community structure) are allowed but sensitive-
ubiquitous taxa remain common and abundant; ecosystem functions are fully
maintained through redundant attributes of the system.
• (b) Quality criteria: The biological condition shall reflect no more than a minimal
departure from reference condition as observed at the least disturbed reference
site(s) within Class C waters.
30 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Objectives Hierarchy
EPA took the workshop participants' ideas and concerns and developed an Objectives Hierarchy
(Appendix G) for USVI. An objectives hierarchy arranges objectives from broad, overarching
goals to lower-level, specific accomplishments or actions. Objectives in the uppermost levels of
the hierarchy reflect broad or inclusive values. Progress towards these objectives is achieved by
meeting lower-level, subordinate objectives.
In addition to the ideas from the workshop, objectives were derived from additional sources:
• The USVI Coastal Zone Management (VICZM) Act, Section 903(b), which states the basic
goals for USVI coastal zones (see Chapter 2);
• A priority-setting document developed by NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation program (NOAA
2010; CRCP) through a collaborative process with core USVI coral reef managers. NOAA
and the core managers developed a framework of goals (Appendix H);
• The First Annual Centennial Strategy for the Buck Island Reef National Monument (Tutein
2007; Appendix I);
• The First Annual Centennial Strategy for Virgin Islands National Park (Hardgrove 2007[a];
Appendix J);
• The First Annual Centennial Strategy for the Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument
(Hardgrove 2007[b]; Appendix K). These documents were developed by the Park
Superintendents, as part of the National Park Service Centennial Initiative to prepare
national parks for a second century of conservation, preservation and enjoyment; and
• The St. Croix East End Marine Park Management Plan (Appendix L). The Nature
Conservancy (TNC) developed this plan for the Virgin Islands DPNR, Division of Coastal
Zone Management in 2002. TNC held a series of community workshops in 2001 with broad
stakeholder participation to develop the management strategies and action plans.
DPS//? Coral Reef Website
Based on the information gathered from this workshop (and from subsequent workshops in the
Florida Keys in June of 2009 and Puerto Rico in April of 2010), EPA developed the on-line
ReefLink Database (www.epa.gov/ged/coralreef) utilizing a systems approach to integrate
ecosystem services into the decision process, including elucidation of linkages between
decisions, human activities, and provisioning of reef ecosystem goods and services. The
ReefLink database employs a systems framework (e.g., the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-
Response [DPSIR] framework) to ensure that critical concepts are not overlooked. ReefLink
applies systems thinking to describe the connections between decisions, human activities, and
provisioning of reef ecosystem goods and services (Appendix M).
This database provides a navigable hierarchy of related topics and information for each topic
including concept maps, scientific citations, management options, and laws. The database
provides an example of using a systems thinking framework to integrate scientific research with
decision-making, and in concert with the systems thinking tutorial (www.epa.gov/ged/tutorial),
presents approaches that are broadly applicable to any environmental management problem.
Chapter 3. Summary and Lessons Learned | 31
-------
The ReefLink Database can be used by: 1) the public to learn how their community may affect
or benefit from coral reefs, 2) scientists to identify decision scenarios for which their research
may be relevant, and 3) reef managers to understand how systems thinking can aid in
identifying alternative management options.
32 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix A. About the U.S. Virgin Islands
Geology and Geography
USVI is a United States territory that comprises 68 islands located in the Caribbean Sea and the
Atlantic Ocean, about 50 miles east of Puerto Rico. The three largest islands are St. Croix (80 sq
mi/207 sq km), St. Thomas (32 sq mi/83 sq km), and St. John (20 sq mi/52 sq km) (Figure A-l).
Florida
AREA MAPPED
Caribbean Sea
Anegada
Flamingo Pond
The Settlement
Atlantic Ocean
Virgin
Guana Great Gorda
Island Camano
Virgin Passage
Jost Van Dyke Tortola
Cane Garden Bay RoadTm
18' 30'
Spanish
Town
.ML.
Culebra
(Puerto Rico)
Vieques
(Puerto Rioo)
Charlotte
Amalie
St. Thomas
"west End Ginger Island
SB? PeterCooper Island
Island
ct i^hr. Norman
St. John lsland
Caribbean Sea
U.S. Virgin Is.
British Virgin Is.
Airfield
Frederlksl&d
St Croix
Chrlsllansled
0
I '
0
18'
10km
>-i
8 mi
64-301
65°
©1997 MAGELLAN Geographix--1'
(805) 685-3100 www.maps.oom
Figure A-l. Map of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The Virgin Islands (U.S. and British) lie on the boundary of two tectonic plates (the North
American and the Caribbean). The Puerto Rican Trench is located north of St. Thomas and
reaches depths of more than 27,500 feet. This is the deepest area of the Atlantic Ocean
(Figure A-2).
Appendix A. About the Virgin Islands | 33
-------
Figure A-2. Bathymetry of the northeast corner of the Caribbean plate
Most of the Virgin Islands, including St. Thomas and St. John, were formed by volcanic activity
when the North American plate began to slide under the Caribbean plate. This subduction zone
produced a series of violent volcanic eruptions, resulting in the great submarine mountain
range that now extends east and southeast from Cuba, through the curving chain of the Lesser
Antilles to Trinidad, off the coast of Venezuela. The volcanic action, which formed St. Thomas
and St. John, appears to be still active among some of the "newer" islands like Guadeloupe and
Martinique, causing occasional earthquakes. These earthquakes are small and do not seriously
affect the Virgin Islands (Rankin 2002).
St. Thomas is mountainous and has many harbors and bays. The territorial capital, Charlotte
Amalie, is on St. Thomas. Its economy is based on tourism, with many cruise ships visiting its
fine, deep-water harbors. St. John is characterized by rugged terrain with steep, rocky slopes.
More than 80% of the island is covered with hillsides sloped at more than a 30% grade (CH2M
Hill, 1979). Slope failure is common during storm events and may have devastating effects on
terrestrial, coastal, and marine habitats. More than half of St. John is under the jurisdiction of
the National Park Service.
St. Croix is less rugged than St. Thomas and St. John, with sloping hills and a gentle coastline.
The Virgin Islands Basin separates St. Croix from the northern Virgin Islands. Depths in this basin
can be greater than 13,500 feet. St. Croix's economy depends not only on tourism, but also on
manufacturing, agriculture and rum distilling. St. Croix's two main towns are Christiansted on
the north coast and Frederiksted on the west.
USVI has no perennial streams and only limited groundwater resources. Accordingly, 65% of
freshwater supplies are provided by energy-consumptive desalinated seawater, making it, at
over 4 cents a liter, the most expensive publicly supplied water in the United States.
34 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
History
The Virgin Islands were settled by the Ciboney (Stone Age hunters) beginning around 2000 BC,
followed by the peaceful Arawaks (aka Tainos) who migrated up the Antillean chain from what
is now Venezuela, until they reached the Virgin Islands sometime around 300 AD. The Arawaks
led a simple agricultural lifestyle, fishing and farming. They peacefully dominated the islands
until the 15th century, when the warlike Carib Indians from South America subjugated them.
In 1493, Christopher Columbus "discovered" (but did not settle in) the Virgin Islands and named
them for Saint Ursula and her virgin followers (a 4th century princess raped and murdered by
the Huns). Over the next three hundred years, the islands were held by many European powers,
including Spain, Britain, the Netherlands, France and Denmark. The Europeans assimilated or
exterminated the remaining Carib Indians.
The Danish West India Company settled on St. Thomas in 1672, on St. John in 1683 and
purchased St. Croix from France in 1733. The European colonists grew a variety of cash crops,
including tobacco, cotton, coffee and sugarcane. Africans were brought to the Virgin Islands in
the 1700s as slaves to work the sugar and cotton plantations. The islands became royal Danish
colonies in 1754. The Danish abolished slavery in the islands in 1792. As a result, the large
plantations were no longer sustainable.
The United States purchased the islands from Denmark on March 31, 1917 because of their
strategic position alongside the approach to the Panama Canal. The territory was renamed the
Virgin Islands of the United States. Water Island, a small island to the south of St. Thomas, was
not included in the original sale. It remained in the possession of the Danish West India
Company until 1944, when it was bought by the United States.
USVI residents were granted U.S. citizenship in 1927, although they cannot vote in presidential
elections. Since 1973 a nonvoting delegate has represented them in the U.S. House of
Representatives.
Demographics
In 2005, the USVI population was estimated to be 108,700. Approximately 95% of the
population lives on the islands of St. Thomas and St. Croix (each with over 51,000 residents).
The population is predominantly black (76.2%), with 13.1% white, 1.1% Asian American and
6.1% reported as other in the 2000 U.S. census.
Tourism is the primary economic activity in USVI, which normally hosts 2 million visitors each
year. Tourism accounts for more than 70% of both employment and the gross domestic
product. Minimum wage is the same as in the U.S. mainland, and the standard of living is higher
than that of most neighboring Caribbean islands.
Regulatory context
The principal regulatory authority governing the aquatic ecosystems of the U.S. and its
territories is the U.S. Clean Water Act (CWA; 33 USC 1972), which authorizes governmental
bodies to restore and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the Nations'
waters. Coral reefs within U.S. boundaries and territorial waters fall under this authority.
Appendix A. About the Virgin Islands | 35
-------
The CWA establishes various programs for implementation of its goals and objectives. Following
are relevant sections of the CWA that rely on biological monitoring data—sections that can be
addressed through integrated bioassessment procedures:
• Section 303(c)(2)(A) provides statutory authority for a state/territory to develop water
quality standards that consist of a designated use for coral reefs (e.g., to support aquatic
life or recreational activities), criteria to protect that use, and an anti-degradation policy to
prevent any further loss or degradation in the system. It states "...State/territory water
quality standards shall protect and enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes
of the Act, including protecting and propagation of a balanced indigenous population
offish, shellfish, and wildlife [fishable/swimmable] and recreation in and on the water."
• Section 304(a) provides statutory authority to develop biological criteria (biocriteria)
to protect coral reefs: "EPA shall...develop and publish information on methods for
establishing and measuring water quality criteria for toxic pollutants on other bases than
pollutant-by-pollutant criteria, including biological monitoring and assessment methods."
• Section 305(b) establishes a process for reporting information about the quality of the
Nation's water resources. States/territories are required to assess the general status of
water bodies and identify, in general terms, known or suspected causes of water quality
impairments, including biological impairments. This information is compiled into a
biennial National Water Quality Inventory report to Congress.
• Section 303(d) requires states/territories to prepare and submit lists of specific water
bodies that currently violate, or have the potential to violate water quality standards,
including designated uses and numeric or narrative criteria such as biocriteria. Those
water bodies "listed" as failing to meet the water quality standards require a total
maximum daily load (TMDL) designation. The TMDL process quantifies the loading capacity
of a waterbody for a given stressor and ultimately provides a quantitative means to
allocate pollutant loads. A TMDL is suitable for chemical as well as non-chemical stressors,
such as sediment deposition or physical alteration of habitat.
• Section 319 establishes a voluntary non-point source control program by which
states/territories control the impacts of runoff using guidance and information about
different types of non-point source pollution. Bioassessment protocols are particularly
effective for characterizing cumulative and integrated impacts of multiple stressors.
• Section 402 makes it illegal to discharge any pollutant to waters of the United States from
a 'point source' unless authorized by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. A permit is required in any case where a discharger causes a water quality
violation, including biological impairments.
• Section 301(h) describes a Waiver Program that allows marine dischargers to defer
secondary treatment if they can show that discharge does not adversely affect biological
communities. As part of this program, extensive biological monitoring is required to detect
any effects on the biological communities.
• Section 403(c) requires that all ocean dischargers provide an assessment of the biological
community in the area surrounding the discharge. The Ocean Discharger Program
sometimes requires extensive biological monitoring.
36 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
• Other Federal Acts that apply to coral reef protection include:
• Coral Reef Conservation Act Of 2000 (16 USC 6401 et seq.)
• Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (aka Ocean Dumping Act;
MPRSA; 33 USC 1401-1445, 16 USC 1431-1447f, 33 USC 2801-2805)
• Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), as amended (16 USC 1451 et seq.)
• Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (101 H.R.1465, P.L. 101-380)
• National Marine Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (NMSA) as amended (16 USC 1431 et seq.)
• National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 USC § 4321 et seq.)
• Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 7 USC § 136, 16 USC § 1531 et seq.)
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976
(Public Law 94-265).
Appendix A. About the Virgin Islands | 37
-------
-------
Appendix B. Workshop Agenda
September 11, Tuesday Afternoon (Day 1)
I. Welcome and Introductions
II. USVI and Federal Agency presentations (5-10 minutes each)
Representatives from each agency or program within an agency will provide similar information
about their agency's work and roles (answers to questions below). During each presentation, we
will record their information into a matrix (Excel file projected overhead from a computer).
• What is your Agency's role in protection of coral reefs?
• What level of coral condition is needed to provide services?
• What are the most critical threats to your Agency's interests?
• What information is being used and what is needed to perform your role?
• What tools are you using and what tools are needed to protect coral reefs?
• What is your geographic purview?
• Who are the customers for your data products?
• How do they use your data products? What kinds of decisions do they make?
III. Update of EPA Activities
EPA sampled 59 sites around St. Croix during 2006. Sites were located near sources of human
disturbance to test sensitivity of coral indicators and evaluate field protocols. During 2007, a
probabilistic (random) survey is proposed to assess coral condition.
• 2006 Results: Field testing of protocols
• 2007 Survey: Proposed probabilistic design
IV. Toward a Common Vision - Articulating the Assessment Questions
Multiple groups and agencies are working within USVI to monitor and assess coral reef
condition. An integrated monitoring design is efficient when agency information needs overlap.
Examples from the Chesapeake Bay and Florida Keys will illustrate how an integrative
monitoring and assessment program can work across agencies. The collaborative process used
by those agencies to define their assessment questions will be presented as a model for the next
day's discussions.
• Lessons learned from other resources and programs
• Model for developing a long-term monitoring plan for USVI
Appendix B. Workshop Agenda | 39
-------
September 12, Wednesday (Day 2)
V. Connect Management Issues to Monitoring Objectives
As a group we will identify the key management issues for coral reefs in USVI. Issues will
potentially differ by agency. As a group we will identify where agency needs overlap. Smaller
breakout group (8-10 people) will identify the monitoring objectives for each management
issue, i.e., the specific information that is needed.
• What are your agency goals and objectives?
• What are the major obstacles to sustainable reef ecosystems and services?
• Which obstacles can be overcome through environmental management?
• What assessment questions address the most important management issues?
VI. Connect Monitoring Objectives to Data Collection
Various monitoring protocols have been developed and implemented in USVI including EPA's
rapid bioassessment protocol that was used in 2006. Other groups typically use other methods
that are not likely comparable. For the monitoring objectives identified in the previous section,
we will identify the types of data needed to assess and report resource condition. As a group we
will match agency monitoring needs with specific data products. As part of this process we will
also identify information gaps that need additional research.
• What monitoring tools are needed to address assessment questions?
• What information will be lacking? Can it be obtained through applied research?
• How will stakeholders interpret data and understand decision points?
• What data are already being collected? What resources are available?
• Who is responsible for the data management?
• How will monitoring results be reported?
September 13, Thursday morning (Day 3)
VII. Recap work of previous days
VIM. Next Steps: Community-wide participation
Long-term monitoring programs require long-term commitment. Trend detection requires
consistent data collection over a period of years. We will discuss what aspects of EPA's proposed
monitoring approach are relevant for different USVI programs and how the probabilistic survey
design should be implemented to maximize useful information for the management of coral
reefs, e.g., determine what percentage of sampling locations should be new, previously visited,
randomly selected, etc. Then we will identify which agencies are interested in participating in
the November survey and future monitoring efforts.
• How will stakeholder perspectives be incorporated?
• How will continuous, long-term involvement be maintained?
40 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix C. Workshop Participants
Name
Heidi Bell
Rafe Boulon
Patricia Bradley
Diane Capehart
Wayne Davis
Courtney Dickenson
Bill Fisher
Leska Fore
Mark Hardgrove
Aaron Hutchins
Chris Jeffrey
Ben Kenlarts
Karlyn Langjahr
Charles LoBue
Ian Lundgren
Leah Motta
Anita Nibbs
Nadine Noorhasan
Norman Quinn
William Tobias
Joel Tutein
Emily Tyner
Beverly Yoshioka
Organization
EPA OW OST
NPS
EPAORD
DPNRDEP
EPAOEI
DPNRDEP WPC
EPAORD
Statistical Design
NPS
DPNR
NOAA NOS
DPNRDEP WPC
DPNRCZM
EPA Region 2
NPS SIX
DPNRDEP
DPNRDEP
DPNRDEP
DPNR
DPNRDFW
NPS
UVI VIMAS
US F&WS BFO
Phone
202-566-1089
340-693-8950 x224
305-809-4690
340-773-1082
410-305-3030
340-773-1082
850-934-9394
206-632-4635
340-776-6201 x 242
340-773-1082
301-713-3028x134
340-773-1082
340-773-1082 x2306
212-637-3798
340-773-1460 x236
340-773-1082
340-773-1082
340-773-1082
340-514-4108
340-713-2415
340-773-1460x221
340-513-0099
787-851-7279x227
Email
bell.heidi@epa.gov
rafe.boulon@nps.gov
bradley.patricia@epa.gov
capehart.diane@vidpnr-dep.org
davis.wayne@epa.gov
dickenson.courtney@vidpnr-dep.org
fisher.william@epa.gov
leska@seanet.com
mark_hardgrove@nps.gov
hutchins.aaron@vidpnr-dep.org
chris.jeffrey@noaa.gov
kenlarts.benjamin@vidpnr-dep.org
karlyn.langjahr@dpnr.gov.vi
lobue.charles@ epa.gov
ian_lundgren@nps.gov
motta.leah@vidpnr-dep.org
nibbs.anita@vidpnr-dep.org
noorhasan.nadine@vidpnr-dep.org
norman.quinn@dpnr.gov.vi
william.tobias@vitelcom.net
joel_tutein@nps.gov
etyner@uvi.edu
beverly_yoshioka@fws.gov
Appendix C. Workshop Participants | 41
-------
-------
Appendix D. Organizations Represented at the
Workshop
USVI Department of Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR)
DPNR's mission is to protect, maintain and manage the natural and cultural resources of the
Virgin Islands for the benefit of present and future generations. DPNR is responsible for the
administration and enforcement of all laws pertaining to the preservation and conservation of
fish and wildlife, trees and vegetation, coastal zones, cultural and historical resources, water
resources, and air, water and oil pollution. DPNR is also responsible for oversight and
compliance of land survey, land subdivision, development and building permits, code
enforcement, earth change permits, zoning administration, boat registration, and mooring and
anchoring of vessels within territorial waters. The Department formulates long-range
comprehensive and functional development plans for the human, economic and physical
resources of the territory.
Three DPNR Divisions were represented at the workshop - the Divisions of Coastal Zone
Management, Environmental Protection, and Fish and Wildlife.
Division of Coastal Zone Management (DCZM)
In 1978, the Virgin Islands Legislature enacted the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone
Management Act as a means of regulating development and managing coastal
resources in the Territory. CZM works, coordinates and partners with various local and
national government agencies to develop and implement a variety of projects and
programs, including review, processing and enforcement of minor and major
development permits in the first tier of the coastal zone.
Division of Environmental Protection (DEP)
The DEP is responsible for environmental protection and the enforcement of
environmental laws and regulations in the USVI. The DEP receives funding and has been
delegated responsibility for environmental protection by the EPA, under the auspices of
EPA Region 2.
Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW)
The DFW is charged with monitoring and assessing territorial fish and wildlife, and
implementing public awareness and other activities that help to enhance and safeguard
fish and wildlife resources in the USVI. The DFW is 100% federally funded by awards
from the U. S. Department of Interior, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Federal Aid
Division, the U. S. Department of Commerce, the National Marine Fisheries Service and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Appendix D. Organizations Represented at the Workshop | 43
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Congress and the President established EPA in 1970 to protect human health and the
environment. Today, EPA employs about 16,000 people across the country, many of whom
work out of its 10 regional offices and 27 laboratories across the country. The agency conducts
environmental assessment, research, and education. It has the primary responsibility for setting
and enforcing national standards under a variety of environmental laws, in consultation with
state, tribal, territorial and local governments.
The President's Ocean Action Plan directs the EPA to develop biological assessment methods
and biological criteria for evaluating the health of coral reefs and associated water quality. In
response, EPA has formed a Coral Reef Biocriteria Working Group (CRBWG) with
representatives from EPA Program and Regional Offices. The goal of the CRBWG is to foster
development of coral reef biocriteria through focused research, evaluation, and communication
among Agency partners and interactive implementation with U.S. jurisdictions.
Four EPA organizations were represented at the workshop - Region 2, Office of Water (OW),
Office of Research and Development (ORD), and Office of Environmental Information (OEI).
Office of Environmental Information
OEI headed by the Chief Information Officer, manages the life cycle of information to
support EPA's mission of protecting human health and the Environment. OEI identifies
and implements innovative information technology and information management
solutions that strengthen EPA's ability to achieve its goals. OEI ensures the quality of
EPA's information, and the efficiency and reliability of EPA's technology, data collection
and exchange efforts, and access services.
Office of Research and Development
The EPA relies on sound science to safeguard both human health and the environment.
ORD is the scientific research arm of EPA. ORD's leading-edge research helps provide the
solid underpinning of science and technology for the Agency. ORD conducts research on
ways to prevent pollution, protect human health, and reduce risk. The work at ORD
laboratories, research centers, and offices across the country helps improve the quality
of air, water, soil, and the way we use resources. Applied science at ORD builds our
understanding of how to protect and enhance the relationship between humans and
the ecosystems of the earth.
Office of Water
The Office of Water (OW) is responsible for implementing the CWA and Safe Drinking
Water Act, and portions of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990,
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Ocean Dumping Ban Act, Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act, Shore Protection Act, Marine Plastics Pollution Research
and Control Act, London Dumping Convention, the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships and several other statutes. OW activities are targeted
to prevent pollution wherever possible and to reduce risk for people and ecosystems in
the most cost-effective ways possible. OW provides guidance, specifies scientific
methods and data collection requirements, performs oversight and facilitates
communication among those involved. As soon as OW and Regional staff have helped
44 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
the states and territories to build capacity, many water programs are delegated to them
to implement.
Region 2
Each of EPA's 10 Regional Offices is responsible within its states for the execution of the
Agency's programs. EPA Region 2 consists of New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, the
USVI and seven federally-recognized Indian nations. The region is home to unique and
largely intact ecosystems such as the New Jersey Pine Barrens, the Adirondack State
Park (the largest publicly protected area in the mainland U. S.), the Hudson River,
Niagara Falls, the Caribbean National Forest and the Virgin Islands National Park. These
ecosystems present diverse environmental management challenges. EPA works hard in
the region to ensure clean air, pure water and better-protected land. Region 2 efforts
help provide for healthy communities and ecosystems, compliance with environmental
regulations and environmental stewardship.
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
President Nixon and Congress created NOAA in 1970 to lead the development of a consolidated
national oceanic and atmospheric research and development program and provide a variety of
scientific and technical services to other Federal agencies, private sector interests and the
general public. As directed by the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, NOAA has the
responsibility to conserve coral reef ecosystems. NOAA's coral reef conservation efforts are
carried out primarily through its Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP). The CRCP brings
together expertise from NOAA's Line Offices, including the National Ocean Service (NOS), the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
(OAR) and the National Environmental Satellites, Data and Information Service (NESDIS), for a
multidisciplinary approach to managing and understanding coral reef ecosystems.
National Park Service (NPS)
On August 25, 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed the "Organic Act" creating the National
Park Service, in the Department of the Interior, responsible for protecting the national parks
and monuments. The National Park Service manages 4 parks and monuments in the USVI.
The Virgin Islands National Park became the U.S.'s 29th national park in 1956. The
original park contained the lands on St. John and 0.15 acres on St. Thomas as an
administrative site. In 1962, 5,650 offshore acres were added to the park, and in 1978,
an additional 135 acres on Hassel Island off the island of St. Thomas near the city of
Charlotte Amalie were also added.
Buck Island Reef National Monument, a small, uninhabited island off the northeast
coast of St. Croix, was established to preserve "one of the finest marine gardens in the
Caribbean Sea." The park is one of a few fully marine-protected areas in the National
Park System. The 176-acre island and surrounding coral reef ecosystem support a large
variety of native flora and fauna, including the hawksbill turtle and brown pelican.
Virgin Islands Coral Reef Monument was established in January 2001 when a
presidential proclamation designated 12,708 acres of federally owned submerged lands
Appendix D. Organizations Represented at the Workshop | 45
-------
within the 3-mile belt off of the island of St. John to be protected. These waters support
a diverse and complex system of coral reefs and other ecosystems such as shoreline
mangrove forests and seagrass beds that contribute to their health and survival.
Salt River Bay National Historic Park and Ecological Preserve is a living museum on
St. Croix, USVI. It is a dynamic, tropical ecosystem with prehistoric and colonial-era
archeological sites and ruins. It is home to some of the largest mango forests in the
Virgin Islands as well as coral reefs and a submarine canyon.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
The mission of the FWS is to work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish and
wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. In the USVI,
FWS manages the Buck Island National Wildlife Refuge, a 45-acre island located 2 miles from
the south coast of St. Thomas that was established in 1969. The island is a migratory bird
refuge. The refuge does not include waters surrounding the island; however, spectacular reefs
are in close proximity to the refuge.
University of the Virgin Islands, Center for Marine and Environmental
Studies (CMES)
The Center for Marine and Environmental Studies (CMES) was created in 1999 to bring together
marine related disciplines within the University of the Virgin Islands. CMES is composed of the
Maclean Marine Science Center (MMSC), the Virgin Islands Marine Advisory Service (VIMAS)
and the Virgin Islands Environmental Resource Station (VIERS). CMES conducts research,
outreach and education programs throughout the Virgin Islands. The Center's current research
includes assessing the impact of sedimentation from land development on coral reefs,
evaluating the effectiveness of marine protected areas for sustainable fisheries and
determining the importance of mangrove and seagrass beds as nursery habitats for fisheries
production. Coral reef monitoring programs have been established to track the condition of
coral reefs within the USVI. The Center for Marine and Environmental Studies is committed to
public outreach through training, seminars and educational programs for children, sponsored
by the VIMAS and other educational forums such as eco-camps conducted at the VIERS.
Outreach programs currently focus on non-point source pollution education, environmentally
friendly boating practices and conservation of coastal marine habitats.
46 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix E. Recent Coral Reef Workshops in USVI
or Related to USVI Coral Reefs
*Workshops held after the Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
2013
*Caribbean Coral Reef Protection Group, Steering Committee Meeting. February 25-26, 2013,
at the University of Virgin Islands, St. Thomas.
The first meeting of the partnership between territorial and federal agencies to
coordinate efforts in protecting and conserving coral reef ecosystems in Puerto Rico and
the USVI. A public listening session was convened and a wide variety of comments,
identifying environmental threats and issues, were received.
*30th USCRTF Meeting. November 2013. St. Croix, USVI.
The meeting provided a venue to report on the status of ongoing coral reef initiatives in
local areas, an opportunity to discuss resolutions and the status of past resolutions, and
allow for public participation regarding coral reefs and coral reef conservation.
2012
* Practical Methods for Conducting Threat Assessments for Reef Managers. June 3-7, 2012,
in St. Thomas, USVI.
A training workshop sponsored by the Coral Disease and Health Consortium (CDHC) to
equip coral reef resource managers with the concepts of a threat (risk) assessment and
provide an opportunity for hands-on practical application of the concepts using a local
case study.
* First Annual NOAA in the Caribbean Meeting. May 15-16, 2012, at the University of the Virgin
Islands, St. Thomas.
Marine managers, politicians, conservationists and scientists from NOAA and partner
agencies working in the U.S. Caribbean territories met to discuss strategic priorities,
challenges, needs and opportunities for greater collaboration.
*Tropical Americas Coral Reef Resilience Workshop. April 29-May 5, 2012. Republic of Panama.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) assembled 36 scientists
from 18 countries and territories to assess status and trends of Caribbean reefs at a
workshop held at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) in the Republic of
Panama.
Appendix E. Recent Coral Workshops in USVI | 47
-------
2010
*Reef Resilience and Climate Change: A Workshop for Coral Reef Managers. May 10-14, 2010.
St. Thomas, USVI.
Sponsored by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program and The Nature Conservancy. This
workshop, based on A Reef Manager's Guide to Coral Bleaching (The Manager's Guide)
and the Reef Resilience Toolkit: Resources for Reef Managers (R2 Toolkit), provided a
response framework for mass bleaching and climate change and MPA design which
incorporates the concept of resilience.
* Cora I Reef Priority Setting Workshop. 2010.
NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) held a workshop to bring together reef
managers with the goal of identifying management priorities of consensus for their
region. The workshop recommendations were reviewed by other managers and
scientists, who served as advisors in the process.
2009
* Atlantic/Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystem Integrated Observing System (CREIOS) Workshop.
May 13-14, 2009. San Juan, Puerto Rico.
NOAA scientists with technical expertise in mapping and monitoring coral reef
ecosystems met with resource managers, local scientists, and representatives from
Federal agencies and Fishery Management Councils. The objectives of the workshop
were to: 1) identify mapping and monitoring priorities for local, regional, and national
management efforts; 2) identify data and information needed to address current gaps;
and 3) identify potential products and new solutions for meeting management needs.
The facilitated workshop elicited priority information needs from managers and
highlighted important issues of concern.
*Second National Meeting of the Regional Fishery Management Councils' Scientific and
Statistical Committees. November 10-13, 2009. St. Thomas, USVI.
Hosted by the Caribbean Fishery Management Council, the workshop provided an
opportunity for representatives from the eight regional council SSCs to compare notes
and best practices.
2007
Capacity building workshops and teacher workshops. 2007.
Sponsored by the Virgin Islands Network of Environmental Educators to build awareness
of the importance of coral reefs and teach and encourage positive behaviors that will
protect and nurture them
48 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
2006
Satellite Tools and Bleaching Response Workshop: Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
St. Croix, USVI, January 23-25, 2006.
Workshop hosted by NOAA and The Nature Conservancy introduced satellite data
products and participants discussed the regional response to the 2005 coral-bleaching
event.
Southern Florida/Caribbean Network Vital Signs Workshop, St. Croix, USVI, May 9-10, 2006.
Sponsored by the National Park Service, about 70 participants identified and ranked
indicators for all park habitats of which coral reefs were a subset.
Available: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/sfcn/monitoring.cfm.
National Parks and Caribbean Marine Reserves Research and Monitoring Workshop, St. John,
USVI, July 11-13, 2006.
Workshop was sponsored by The National Park Service (NPS) and the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) and was attended by 30 regional scientists and managers. The focus of
the meeting was research, monitoring, and management within Marine Protected Areas
in Florida and the Caribbean.
16th Coral Reef Task Force Meeting, St. Thomas, USVI, October 24-28, 2006.
The national meeting included public workshops and talks highlighting research results
and management tools for Caribbean reefs.
Available: http://www.coralreef.gov/taskforce/index.html
Watershed and Stormwater Management Workshop, St. Croix USVI, August 14-16, 2006.
Workshop was sponsored by NOAA and attended primarily by USVI DPNR staff. Topics
included erosion and sediment control, stormwater management, and watershed
planning.
Comprehensive U.S. Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystem Monitoring Project (C-CCREMP) FY2006
Workshop, La Parguera, Puerto Rico, on September 18-19, 2006, and St. Thomas, USVI, on
September 21-22, 2006.
Sponsored by NOAA, these workshops described goals of CCREMP to discuss options for
improving the integration of ongoing coral reef ecosystem monitoring activities.
Conservation Planning Training. May 23-25, 2006, at the UVI St. Croix Campus.
Over 25 DPNR, USDA, UVI and local nonprofit staff members participated in an Area-
Wide Conservation Planning Training workshop conducted by USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) trainers and hosted by the Virgin Islands Resource
Conservation and Development Council, Inc. (VI RC&D), in cooperation with DPNR-CZM
and the SEA.
Appendix E. Recent Coral Workshops in USVI | 49
-------
Workshop on Managing Watersheds and Stormwater Runoff in the USVI. August 2006.
DPNR-CZM hosted a three-day Watershed Planning Workshop to improve territorial
stormwater management, watershed planning and coral reef protection. With the
assistance of NOAA, experts from the Center for Watershed Protection (CWP) designed
the workshop to increase agency-wide watershed- based planning and resource
management capacity. Outcomes from the workshop included a report of findings and
recommendations for strengthening existing program effectiveness and catalyzing
DPNR's watershed management efforts, as well as a watershed management plan and
demonstration project for Coral Bay, St. John.
Status of the USVI Coral Reefs Workshop. October 24, 2006. St. Thomas, USVI.
DPNR hosted a one-day workshop to engage local policy and decision makers in a
solution-oriented discussion about the state of USVI coral reef ecosystems.
2005
Caribbean Workshop on MPA Effectiveness and Adaptive Management. May 2005, St. Croix,
USVI.
This workshop, held by NOAA, TNC and OC, strengthened efforts to develop and
improve management plans in selected Caribbean MPAs. The workshop was designed to
build interest, momentum, and capacity for Caribbean-based marine managers and
conservation practitioners to adaptively manage MPAs in the region.
50 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop
Presentations
Connecting Management Issues to Monitoring Objectives:
Patricia Bradley, USEPA, ORD
The workshop participants represent agencies from several levels of government (Federal and
territorial levels) which share a common goal of protecting USVI coral reef ecosystems and
coastal water quality. There are, however, real challenges to overcome if we hope to
accomplish these goals. The agencies each have regulatory and fiscal constraints and they are
operating at various scales (from local to global). While there are existing monitoring and
analysis efforts, there still exists a lack of information, lack of resources, and lack of political will
to take the actions necessary to protect or restore coral reef ecosystems. USVI stakeholders,
including regulated industries, public interest groups, non-profit organizations, and academia,
each have their own priorities, points of view, knowledge and information.
But we can work together to optimize our efforts. We should take advantage of every
opportunity to design an integrated monitoring and assessment program in the USVI that:
• Provides a safe and healthy environment for humans and other living things
• Supports the regulatory needs (305b report, 303d listing, development of TMDLs, etc.)
• Supports non-regulatory needs (targeting protection and restoration activities for greatest
environmental return)
• Functions at multiple scales (Marine Protected Area, USVI)
During this workshop, we are going to begin exploring the assessment process. We will identify
management issues, define monitoring objectives, and formulate assessment questions. This
will enable us to collaboratively identify appropriate tools and measurements, identify data
needs and availability, and design the monitoring program. Finally, we will be able to collect
and collate the necessary data, conduct the assessment (respond to the assessment questions),
and communicate the assessment results.
Typical key assessment questions include:
• What are the current conditions of our ecosystems? (Status)
• Where are the conditions improving or declining? (Trends)
• What stressors are associated with declines? (Diagnosis)
• Are our management programs and policies working? (Management)
Sample Coral Reef Assessment Questions that could be considered include:
Characterization of the Problem
• What percent of the USVI coastal waters is comprised of coral reefs? Is it changing?
How fast?
• How much uncolonized acreage has suitable physical habitat for coral reefs?
• What is the current condition of USVI coral reefs? Is it changing? How fast?
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 51
-------
Diagnosis of Causes
• How are USVI coral reefs affected by periodic natural disturbances (e.g., hurricanes)?
• How are USVI coral reefs affected by climate change?
• How have coral diseases influenced the overall health of the USVI coral reefs?
• What is the impact of boat and anchor groundings on coral reefs?
Forecasting
• Will corals that survived the 2005 bleaching event survive the next bleaching event?
• How will future land use impact coral reefs?
• How would the creation of additional MPAs impact USVI coral reefs?
• Would linking existing MPAs improve USVI coral reefs?
EPA recommends the use of a conceptual model to help document the linkages between
ecosystem functions and ecosystem services. EPA has adopted a modified version of the Driving
forces, Pressures, State, Impact and Response (DPSIR) as the basis for a conceptual model of
the USVI coral reef ecosystem (Figure F-l). DPSIR is a general framework that assumes cause-
effect relationships between interacting components of social, economic, and environmental
systems (Smeets and Weterings 1999). This framework was adopted by the European
Environmental Agency and has been used by the United Nations to organize information about
the state of the environment in relation to human activities (UNEP 2007).
Driving Forces
Goc io economic sectors and
cultural factors that drive
human activities (causes)
Pressure
Human activities that
place stress on the
environment (pollutants)
Response
Response of society to the
environmental situation
(policies, decisions)
State
Condition of the environment
(composition, distribution.
quality}
Impact
Effects of environmental
degradation (changes in
attributes, services)
Figure F-l. The DPSIR conceptual model. The DPSIR conceptual model is a systems modeling
approach to graphically and comprehensively illustrate the environmental and socio-economic
relationships in a decision context (Rehr et al. 2012; Bradley et al. 2013). It also provides a
means to begin thinking about how remedial actions (Responses) fit in the overall system.
52 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Bio-Criteria in Support of Integrated Coastal Management in the USVI:
Aaron Hutchins, USVI DPNR, Environmental Program Administrator
The USVI DPNR is tasked with managing the natural resources of the Territory. The most
valuable natural resources in the USVI are its pristine waters and its distinctive marine and
wildlife habitats.
The CWAgoal is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
nation's waters. Under the CWA, USVI must establish water quality standards that define the
goals for all its waters. In establishing water quality standards, USVI must take three major,
interrelated actions:
1. Assign designated uses. USVI must designate one or more human and ecological water
uses that are officially recognized and protected for each waterbody;
2. Establish water quality criteria (descriptions of the conditions considered necessary to
protect each designated use); and
3. Develop and implement anti-degradation policy and procedures (requirements for
protecting all existing uses, keeping clean waters clean, and giving strict protection to
outstanding waters).
Once established, water quality standards drive the development of water quality-based
discharge permits, determine which waters must be cleaned up and how much, and which
waters need protection from pollution. The CWA also establishes significant enforcement
capability, including civil penalties up to $50,000 a day per violation and much more severe
criminal penalties.
CWA Section 305(b) requires each state and territory to prepare a biennial report on the quality
of its waters. A 305(b) report describes the extent to which water bodies (e.g., streams, lakes,
estuaries and coastal waters) support their designated uses (Tables F-l through F-3). The report
also identifies the pollutants or stressors causing impairment of designated uses and the
sources of these stressors (e.g., wastewater treatment plants or mines) (Table F-4). EPA
transmits the individual 305(b) reports to Congress along with a summary report on the
Nation's water quality.
CWA Section 303(d) requires that each state and territory also submit a prioritized list of waters
that do not meet water quality standards. The states/territories must establish priorities for
development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) based on the severity of the pollution and
the sensitivity of the uses to be made of the waters, among other factors, and provide a long-
term plan for completing TMDLs within 8 to 13 years from first listing.
The 305(b) report and 303(d) list are submitted together as an integrated report. States and
territories are encouraged to use probabilistic designs for water quality assessments and to
include reports of these assessments with their integrated reports.
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 53
-------
Table F-l. Total assessed waters for USVI (source: USVI 2006)
Size of Water
Total
Assessed
Waters
Estimated
Total
Water
Size in
USVI
Rivers,
Streams,
Creeks
(Nil«)
0
Unavailable
Bays,
Estuaries
(Miles)
0
Unavailable
Coastal
Shorelines
[Miles)
0
Unavailable
Ocean*,
Near
Coastal
Waters
(Square
miles)
401.14
Unavailable
Note: does not include all waterbody types reported by USVI
Table F-2. USVI assessed waters, individual use support for oceans and near coastal waters
(source: USVI 2006)
State
Designated
Use
Aquatic Life
Use
Primary
Contact
Recreation
Total
Square
Miles
Assessed
401.05
401.14
Percent Percent
Percent
Good Threatened Impaired
93.45
0
97.47 0.01
6.55
2.51
Table F-3. USVI assessed waters, attainment status for oceans and near coastal waters
(source: USVI 2006)
Attainment Status
Good
Threatened
Impaired
Total Square Miles Assessed
Square Miles Percent of Assessed
"|^ 374.87' 93.45
0 0
26.27 6.55
1 401.14 100
54 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Table F-4. USVI top causes of impairments for oceans and near coastal waters
(source: USVI 2006)
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
State Cause Name
Oxygen, Dissolved
Turbidity
Feca! Coliform
Total
Square
Miles
Impaired
18.71
11.73
7,98
Phosphorus (Total)
Enterococcus
PH
Secchi Disk Transparency
© ! Ambient Bioassays - Acute
9
7.76
6.07
3.23
I 3.18
Aquatic Toxidt 2.85
Ambient bioassays -- Chronic Aquatic Toxic 2.85
10 Temperature, Water
| 1.03
Section 181 of the USVI Water Pollution Control Act declares the policy of the USVI is to
conserve the waters of the USVI and to protect, maintain and improve the quality thereof for
public water supplies, for the propagation of wildlife, fish, and aquatic life, and for domestic,
recreational, and other legitimate beneficial uses.
Water quality standards have been established by the USVI to ensure the best usage of waters
within the territory. The Virgin Islands Rules and Regulations, Title 12, Chapter 7, Subchapter
186, Section 11 defines the legal limits of Class A, B, and C waters in the USVI. The three
designated use classifications (Figure F-2) are as follows:
Class A: Preservation of natural phenomena requiring special conditions (e.g., the
Natural Barrier Reef at Buck Island, St. Croix and the Under Water Trail at Trunk Bay,
St. John). Quality criteria: Existing natural conditions shall not be changed. In no case
shall Class B water quality standards be exceeded.
Class B: Propagation of desirable species of marine life (including threatened and
endangered species listed pursuant to section 4 of the federal Endangered Species Act)
and primary contact recreation (the majority of waters in the USVI are Class B).
Class C: Propagation of desirable species of marine life and primary contact recreation
(with less stringent water quality criteria than Class B).
Figure F-2. USVI coastal water designated uses
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 55
-------
Traditional coastal monitoring programs look almost exclusively at abiotic parameters
(e.g., dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, turbidity, etc.) to perform coastal waterbody health
assessments. Abiotic (physical and chemical) parameters are measured to protect the biological
community of a water body from different categories of stress: toxic levels of pollutants and
unhealthy physical conditions. Abiotic parameters consider single stressors, and therefore
cannot account for the cumulative impacts from multiple chemicals that may be coupled with
physical changes in the environment.
Biological assessments provide direct measures of the cumulative response of the biological
community to all sources of stress: they measure the condition of the aquatic resource to be
protected. Therefore, biocriteria set the biological quality goal, or target, to which water quality
can be managed, rather than the maximum allowable level of a pollutant or other water quality
condition in a water body. The most common biological assessment programs found
throughout the Caribbean are most often associated with coral reef monitoring programs. Coral
reef monitoring programs are inherently biological assessment programs as they principally
measure a range of biological conditions and their changes over time.
Major advantages for using biological attributes in monitoring the USVI coastal waters are:
1. They assess pollutants that are bioavailable, ostensibly those that are most important to
marine communities.
2. They reveal the biological effects of pollutants at levels below detection limits.
3. They reveal the biological effects of pollution events that may occur between abiotic
sampling events.
4. And they help assess synergistic, additive, or antagonistic relationships among
pollutants.
Biological attributes are also useful in detecting degradation caused by factors other than
pollution (e.g., habitat structure, flow regime, food [energy], biotic interactions). Biological
criteria are narrative descriptions or numerical values that describe the desired biological
condition (e.g., reference condition) of the aquatic biota inhabiting waters of a specific
designated aquatic life use. Biocriteria are based on measurements of biological attributes.
Indicator development for biocriteria entails an iterative process of review, testing, and analysis
of candidate measurements. An effective indicator must have:
• Relevance to purpose (e.g., does the waterbody meet its designated use?)
• Relevance to ecosystem structure and function (e.g., multiple assemblages)
• Responsiveness to human influence (e.g., does the indicator respond across a gradient
of human disturbance?) (Figure F-3)
• Power to detect differences (e.g., low measurement error)
• Feasibility of implementation (e.g., capacity to commit to long-term monitoring: the
indicators selected should represent measurements that can be expected to be sampled
year after year given the available funds, equipment, expertise, and time)
• Interpretative utility for management (e.g., represent waterbody conditions over time
and reflect the things we care about)
56 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Figure F-3. Condition index responsive to human disturbance
Biocriteria are regulatory standards that serve as benchmarks for decision-making. When
biocriteria standards are not met, the water body is listed as 'impaired' because it is considered
incapable of supporting aquatic life. If a specific cause of impairment is known, the CWA calls
for immediate enforcement and corrective action. If the cause of impairment is not known, it
must be determined and a management plan to correct the causes developed. In the case of
chemical pollutants, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is developed that determines
amounts of pollutant reductions necessary to restore water quality to support aquatic life.
Achieving the TMDL requires changes in land and water use activities in the affected waters and
associated watershed.
Biological assessments and biocriteria can support multiple objectives for natural resource
management:
1. Coastal development permitting (regulation)
2. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development
3. Watershed restoration prioritization
4. Point Source permitting
5. Water Quality Standards development
6. Land and water use planning development
7. Fisheries management
8. Territorial marine park management and establishment
Biological criteria can also contribute to the public understanding of the biological health and
integrity of USVI's water bodies.
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 57
-------
Coral Reef Research at Virgin Islands National Park and Coral Reef
National Monument: Rafe Boulon, Chief, Resource Management
The National Park Service (NFS) role in coral reef protection is to maintain the resource
unimpaired for future generations (Organic Act, 1916). NFS uses three approaches: education,
management and regulation to accomplish their mission. The Virgin Islands National Park
encompasses 5,650 marine acres, and the Virgin Islands Coral reef National Monument
encompasses 12,708 marine acres (Figure F-4). Critical threats to the coral reef ecosystem can
be categorized into things NFS can do something about (e.g., boat groundings, anchor damage,
visitor impacts, sedimentation, eutrophication, over-fishing, etc.) and things NFS can't do
anything about (e.g., sea surface temperature increases, bleaching and coral diseases).
Vttgtn Islands
•
Toul VICRNM Ar*a< 1162 Hr
Figure F-4. Boundaries for the Virgin Islands National Park and Virgin Island Coral Reef
National Monument
The USVI has a long history of coral reef monitoring and ecology. In 1958, Jack Randall and his
team began monitoring in Lameshur Bay. As a result, we have some of the earliest and longest
data sets on coral reef ecology in the Caribbean.
The National Park Service (NPS) South Florida/Caribbean Network (SFCN) was designed to
determine the ecological status of reefs and to be able to detect changes in coral cover and
other indicators in a manner useful for Park managers. SFCN employs videography and
AquaMap as the coral reef monitoring protocol. AquaMap provides a highly precise and
rigorously quality controlled navigation, mapping and electronic observation recording
capability for free-swimming divers. Each diver is outfitted with a small graphics terminal,
indicating current position against a chart display. As objects are encountered, electronic
observations can be recorded at the press of a button, associating attributes with position,
depth and time (Figure F-5).
58 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
The substrate is identified to the lowest taxonomic unit possible (e.g., coral to species, algae to
genus) and entered into a database. Queries of the database produce values on the percent
cover, diversity indices of species, and cover groups. Qualitative data on coral disease are also
collected.
Figure F-5. Coral reef monitoring protocol
2005 Coral Bleaching Event
In 2005, coral reefs throughout the USVI bleached severely in association with record-high
seawater temperatures (Figure F-6). The NFS and US Geological Survey (USGS) used data on the
temperature records for the study sites, the data on coral cover and disease and the digital
photos and videotapes taken during each survey to examine the connection among thermal
stress, bleaching and disease. Data on bleaching and disease were collected before, during and
after this bleaching episode.
Average Monthly Temperature
(at resource depth)
31,0
,27.0
26.O
.-"in
24.0
23,0
ten Fcb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Figure F-6. Average monthly seawater temperatures in USVI (historical and 2005)
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 59
-------
Monitored reefs in the USVI suffered losses of 41-79% live stony coral cover (Figure F-7). Most
coral species bleached, including Acropora palmata, which bleached for the first time on record
in the USVI. Corals with the most color loss suffered greatest mortality, and corals with no color
loss had lowest percent mortality. Agaricia spp. suffered the most bleaching mortality (94.6%),
while the major reef building species and those species that dominate reef cover (e.g.,
Montastraea, Colpophyllia, Diploria spp.) showed relatively low total mortality but suffered high
partial mortality. Approximately six months after the bleaching event, 34% of surviving corals
still had not recovered completely. This loss of coral cover was greater than from all other
stressors affecting the USVI reefs in preceding years.
Corals began to regain their normal coloration once water temperatures began to cool;
subsequently however, an unprecedented regional outbreak of coral disease affected all sites.
While five known diseases or syndromes were recorded, most lesions showed signs consistent
with white plague. Nineteen scleractinian species were affected by disease, and most mortality
was caused by white plague disease.
S. Fore Reef, BUIS
95.6% coral
cover bleached
90.2% coral
cover bleached
96.4% coral
cover bleached
93.6% coral
cover bleached
7 0.9% coral
cover bleached
91.8% coral
cover bleached
Figure F-7. Bleaching on USVI reefs during the 2005 event. BUIS-Buck Island; VMS-Virgin
Islands; STJ-St. John
Research Needs
Further investigation of coral diseases and the synergy between bleaching and diseases is a
research priority. Also needed is research on the connections between human activities, the
resultant stressors (e.g., sedimentation) and coral vulnerability to bleaching and disease. At the
ecosystem scale, research is needed to understand how the loss of coral will affect fishes and
other reef organisms. Finally, research is needed to evaluate the potential role of MPAs (like the
national parks and monuments) in reversing degradation of coral reefs and reef fish
populations.
60 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Data Use
The NFS uses monitoring data to help guide management actions (e.g., protect high diversity
sites and threatened/endangered species), to make visitor use decisions (e.g., moorings and
boat exclusion buoys, limitations on numbers of visitors), to assess damages/claims from
groundings, anchors, etc. (baseline data), for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
compliance, and for outreach and education.
Buck Island Reef National Monument: ian umdgren, Biologist
Buck Island Reef National Monument (BIRNM) is a small, uninhabited, 176-acre island about
1.5 miles north of the northeast coast of St. Croix. It was first established as a protected area by
the U.S. Government in 1948, established as a U.S. national monument in 1961, and greatly
expanded in 2001 (Figure F-8). Originally managed fishing was permitted within the monument
boundaries, but the 2001 expansion implemented complete no-take restrictions to preserve
complete ecosystem services and to create refugia for spillover benefits. The monument now
encompasses 7% of the St. Croix reef shelf, including significant deep-water habitat.
Original Boundary — Expanded Boundary
860acfos 1 S01 Sacra
Figure F-8. Buck Island Reef National Monument boundaries. The original 1961 boundary is
outlined in yellow, and the current boundary is outlined in red. BIRNM encompasses 7% of
the St. Croix shelf.
Mission and Management Goals
The National Park Service mission is "...to promote and regulate the use of the...national
parks...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the
wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such
means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations" (National Park
Service Organic Act, 16 U.S.C.I.). Specific goals for BIRNM include preserving and protecting
imperiled species and habitats, identifying and mitigating ecosystem stressors, and tracking
the recovery of the over-fished ecosystem.
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 61
-------
Coral Monitoring
Monitoring in BIRNM includes AquaMap, inventories of cryptic species (e.g., Caribbean spiny
lobster, turtles, Acropora palmata), and monitoring at spawning aggregation zones. AquaMap
(described above) is a high tech approach that provides considerable statistical power
(Figure F-9).
Linear Chain Transects
Aquamap video
System
Coral Colony Monitoring
Figure F-9. Monitoring approaches employed at BIRNM
Additionally, research has begun on mesophotic and deep reef ecosystems. Mesophotic Coral
Ecosystems (MCEs) are coral-dominated communities that occur in the deepest half of the
photic zone (30 m to >150 m). Compared to shallow water reefs, extremely little is known
about MCEs, since they lie beyond traditional SCUBA diving limits. However, advances in diving
technology and underwater robotics are now making MCE research feasible. NOAA's R/V Nancy
Foster began conducting exploratory deep water mapping surveys in 2004. Surveys include fine-
scale mapping using side-scan sonar and multibeam backscatter and use of a remotely
operated vehicle (ROV) to ground-truth the remotely sensed data (Figure F-10).
Figure F-10. NOAA's RV Nancy Foster (left) and ROV (right)
62 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Future goals
NFS is analyzing the data to see if it supports no-take MPAs as an effective marine conservation
tool in the US Virgin Islands. They also plan to increase collaboration with USVI partners to
synergistically monitor two other MPAs - the East End Marine Park and the Salt River Bay
National Historic Park and Ecological Preserve (both located on St. Croix).
Coral Monitoring Activities within the St. Croix East End Marine Park:
Karlyn Langjahr, NOAA Coral Management Fellow, DPNR, Division of Coastal Zone
Management
The St. Croix East End Marine Park (EEMP) is the USVI's first marine park and was established
on January 15, 2003. Extending from the high-water mark out three miles, it encompasses 60
square miles of fringing reefs, mangrove forests, seagrass beds and nesting sites for
endangered sea turtles (Figure F-ll). The park's mission is to protect this diversity and beauty
for generations to come.
The St. Croix EEMP is a multi-use park. There are four different types of managed areas within
its boundaries:
• Recreation Management Areas
• Turtle Wildlife Preserve Area, protecting the primary hawksbill and green turtle nesting
beaches on Jack Bay, Isaac Bay and East End Bay
• About five square miles of No-Take Areas, which are off limits to any fishing and
harvesting
• Open Areas.
y>y East End Marine Park
. . _.
. , . . . ./
East End Marine Park Zonation
Open Fishing Area (S1.6%(
^B Rl'L-ICJllLUl A It'.l (2.8%)
VZft Turtle Wildlife Area (7.0%)
,'No Take Area 18.6%}
Figure F-ll. East End Marine Park, St. Croix, USVI boundaries
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 63
-------
DPNR's Division of Coastal Zone Management mission is to protect, maintain, preserve,
enhance and restore the overall quality of the environment in the coastal zone (V.I. Code
Title 12, Section 904[h]). The EEMP is a mechanism to employ three strategies for managing
USVI submerged lands and marine and coastal resources: legislation and regulation, monitoring
and research, and education and outreach.
Reef fish are surveyed along a belt transect (25 X 4m) and through roving diver surveys. Metrics
include: abundance, distribution, size structure, and community structure (diversity, richness),
trophic structure, and spawning aggregation sites. Coral reef habitat is monitored using the
NOAA protocol. Sample sites are selected via stratified random design using hard and soft
bottom habitat types delineated in NOAA's benthic habitat map (Menza et al. 2006). The
objective is to generate baseline data, monitor change in habitats/organisms over time, and
compare results to the Territorial Coral Reef Monitoring Program results (described below).
The Caribbean Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus) is a species of concern (Figure F-12). The
objective of lobster monitoring is to characterize the lobster population within the park and to
use the data to inform management of species, evaluate effectiveness of no-take areas in
protecting/increasing stock, and monitor change in the population over time. The lobster
monitoring protocol is the National Park Service protocol (developed by the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission).
Figure F-12. Species of concern - Caribbean Spiny Lobster (Panulirus argus) and Elkhorn Coral
(Acropora palmata).
Acropora species are also of concern (Figure F-12). Elkhorn and staghorn corals were listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act on May 9, 2006. There are two objectives for
Acropora monitoring: Rapid assessment of EEMP population to document the baseline
distribution of Acropora within EEMP and long-term monitoring to monitor the change in
permanently marked colonies over time.
In addition to the monitoring conducted in the EEMP, there is also monitoring conducted
territory-wide. The Territorial Coral Reef Monitoring Program (TCRMP) is a partnership with the
University of the Virgin Islands' Center for Marine and Environmental Studies and the DPNR
Division of Fish and Wildlife. The objectives of the program are to understand the processes
affecting coral reef ecosystems in the USVI and develop scientifically based management
strategies for the Caribbean. There are currently 8 monitoring sites in St. Croix and 6 monitoring
64 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
sites in St. Thomas/St. John. The TCRMP conducts semi-annual monitoring of benthic cover with
videographic methods (Aronson et al. 1994; Rogers et al. 2001), in situ assessments of coral
health (Kramer et al. 2005), reef visual censuses of mobile coral reef resources, and sensor-
based monitoring of oceanographic variables (continuous monitoring: temperature,
chlorophyll, turbidity, currents; episodic monitoring/CTD: PAR, DO, salinity). Oceanographic
monitoring also includes fixed equipment such as Acoustic Wave and Current Profilers (2),
Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (6), fluorometers (3), and thermistors (30+).
EEMP Management
In 2007 the St. Croix East End Marine Park Office was established to coordinate all activities of
the EEMP and USVI Coral Reef Initiatives. Rules and regulations have been promulgated. An
outreach and education program was initiated, including school tours, public tours, and snorkel
clinics. Local action strategies are being developed for fishing, recreational use, land-based
sources of pollution, and lack of awareness.
US Caribbean Coral Reef Ecosystem Monitoring Program: Christopher F.G.
Jeffrey, NOAA / CCMA Biogeography Program
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Biogeography Program mission
is twofold: 1) to develop knowledge and products on the distribution and ecology of living
marine resources throughout the Nation's estuarine, coastal and marine environments that will
provide resource managers, scientists and the public with an improved ecosystem basis for
making decisions; and 2) to ensure long-term economic, recreational, and environmental
viability of coral reef ecosystems, which are currently threatened by multiple stressors including
climate change, disease, coastal development, invasive species and pollution. Information
about the NOAA Biogeography Program can be found at:
http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/ecosystems/coralreef/cres.html
NOAA's trustee responsibilities for coral reefs are governed by:
• Coral Reef Conservation Act (CRCA)
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA)
• Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)
• Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
• Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
• Coral Reef Protection Executive Order 13089
• Marine Protected Area Executive Order 13158
NOAA's trustee responsibilities for coral reefs are also guided by:
• The US Coral Reef Task Force
• U.S. Ocean Action Plan
• The State of the Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated
States report to Congress
• The National Action Plan to Conserve Coral Reefs
• The National Coral Reef Action Strategy
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 65
-------
The NOAA Biogeography Program has active partnerships with other NOAA organizations
(National Marine Fisheries Service and the National Marine Sanctuaries Program), other Federal
Agencies (National Park Service and US Geological Survey), academic institutions (University of
Miami, Oceanic Institute, University of Puerto Rico and University of Hawaii) and territorial
agencies (Virgin Islands DPNR).
Biogeographic Process
The bioassessment provides a suite of spatially articulated products for use by the USVI and its
partners to support ecosystem-based management and the long-term, comprehensive
protection and conservation of USVI's marine resources. The bioassessment characterizes the
physical and biological environments (e.g., oceanography, habitats) that structure the spatial
and temporal distribution of living marine resources within and adjacent to Buck Island Reef
National Monument boundaries. The Biogeography Branch in consultation with the NOAA
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) developed the biogeographic assessment
approach in 2003 (Kendall and Monaco 2003; Monaco et al. in press).
Typically, a biogeographic assessment is comprised of the three primary components: 1) data
compilation (including mapping and characterization monitoring); 2) data analyses; and 3)
product development in support of management decisions (e.g., defining and evaluating areas
that are candidates for management by marine zoning and targeted enforcement). Figure F-13
shows the first two steps of the process. A key tool used to develop and implement the
assessment is the use of CIS technology to aid in data compilation, spatial analyses, and
visualization of results to support place-based management needs (Battista and Monaco 2004).
Mapping
Acquire Imagery
Characterization /
Monitoring
Sampling Strategy
r
Assessment
Implement Monitoring
Figure F-13. Initial steps in the NOAA biogeographic assessment
66 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Geographic Scope & Location
NOAA's National Ocean Service acquired aerial photographs for the nearshore waters of
Puerto Rico and the USVI in 1999. These images were used to create maps of the region's coral
reefs, seagrass beds, mangrove forests, and other important habitats. Mapped areas
encompass the insular shelf between the shoreline and shelf edge except where turbidity
prevented visualization of the bottom. A primary product of this project is a benthic habitat
atlas that includes detailed methods for creating the benthic maps, and text descriptions with
associated photographic examples of each bottom type mapped. Twenty-one distinct benthic
habitat types within eight zones were mapped directly into a geographic information system
(CIS) using visual interpretation of ortho-rectified aerial photographs. Benthic features were
mapped that covered an area of 1600 km2 in Puerto Rico and 490 km2 in the USVI.
Role in Protection of Coral Reefs
The Caribbean Fishery Management Council needed to meet the Essential Fish Habitat
requirements of the Magnuson Fisheries Act and requested NOAA Biogeography's help to
spatially characterize the fish and benthic habitat. Monitoring began in USVI in 2000, and
efforts have expanded to include spatial characterization, assessment, and monitoring of the
ecosystem (Figure F-14). Special projects have also included evaluation of MPA efficacy at Buck
Island Reef National Monument and a fish tracking study at Virgin Islands Coral Reef National
Monument (VICRNM) in St. John. Over the years, NOAA Biogeography has received increased
funding and more personnel support to conduct the monitoring and assessment efforts.
Sites: 2000-April 2006
St. John
794 visual fish surveys
2880 benthic quadrats
Figure F-14. Biogeography Program station locations in St. John, USVI, 2000-2006
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 67
-------
In the Virgin Islands National Park (VMS) and VICRNM, the biogeography products have been
used to quantify the effects of the Marine Protected Area closure on fishes. In Buck Island Reef
National Monument and the St. Croix East End Marine Park, the biogeography products are
being used to characterize fish abundance and distribution in managed areas (Figure F-15).
. • .«..•• •."• » • ,'
^A^/wJ^Sfc*^^ . • ... *, •* ^iXS^PI "'. *
• • •
•
Sites: 2000-April 2006
Buck Island
1153 visual fish surveys
5765 benthic quadrats
Figure F-15. Biogeography Program station locations around Buck Island, USVI, 2000-2006
A key objective for NOAA Biogeography is to transfer the monitoring capabilities to local
personnel as needed (e.g., VI DPNR). NOAA Biogeography plans to produce a 5-year summary
report and to incorporate this data into the upcoming Status of the Reef Report 2008. NOAA
also plans to expand their efforts to other areas (e.g., to entire St. Croix Island and St. Thomas).
Field Methods and Sample Design
For both of the projects, data was collected through visual fish surveys that allow NOAA and
their clients (National Park Service and USVI DPNR) to address specific questions about the
coral reef ecosystem. NOAA uses a random stratified design. At each site divers lay out a
25 X 4 m transect, along which they conduct visual fish surveys, macroinvertebrate censuses,
and habitat assessments (Figure F-16). From these surveys, NOAA is able to calculate a series of
metrics (Table F-5). NOAA has a project manager and pool of trained biologists who conduct
the surveys. For the sampled region they are able to spatially assess coral cover (Figure F-17),
benthic cover by habitats (Figure F-18) and relationships between habitat and particular species
(Figure F-19). They can also use the data to look at temporal patterns (Figures F-20 and F-21)
and episodic events (Figure F-22).
68 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Om 5m 10m 15m 20m 25m
Figure F-16. NOAA transect and example of data collected along the transect
Table F-5. Types of metrics that can be calculated from NOAA data. A sample = one 100m2
transect per site.
Reef fishes
Abundance by species & size class
Derived community indices
Biomass
Abundance
Richness
Shannon's diversity
Macroinvertebrates
Conch abundance by sexual maturity
Lobster sightings
Diadema sightings
Benthic composition
Biotic composition by taxa/morphotype
% cover
Canopy height
Abundance
Abiotic composition
% cover by substrate category
Depth
Substrate height
Rugosity
Complexity (# large and small holes)
Water quality
Temperature
Salinity
Chlorophyll
Turbidity
Depth
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 69
-------
40-,
I Turf arpJ cmsluic aljjae
i Mac no algae
Cysncbaetetia and ilamentous
«-.<•-->•.-.!
I fire cwal
St.Qoix (586)
US Virgin Islands
Figure F-17. Benthic cover by geographic area
St. John (202)
w
0)
§
y
O5
s
•£•
s
,— .
«v
1
"e
U
O
v-
X
50 -i
45
40 •
35 -
30 -
25 •
20 -
15 -
10-
5 -
0 -
• Turf and cru&to&e algae • Macro algae
i Cyanobacteria and filamentous algae • Coral
O Fire coral Q Gorgonia
a Sponges
Bed«tn;k(3e) Linear rewf <105) Patch reef (99) Pavement (443) Reef rubble (13) Scattered coral
& rock (50)
Benthic habitats
Figure F-18. Benthic cover by habitat type
70 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
VMS. St. John
ish abundance
% Coral cover
Reef ruaosin
Figure F-19. Species-habitat relationships
Species Richness
20
o
6
I I J
2001 2002 2003 2004 2000
Year
E
3
en
ui
CD
El
o
LLJ
0
T
Bomass
1111
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Diversity
2.5
i
1.0
1
I
I I I
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Abundance
S300-
~200-
I
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Figure F-20. Temporal trends in fish assemblages around Buck Island, St. Croix
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 71
-------
Groupers
Rscivores
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
06
0.4
0.2 -
0.0
I
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Snappers
.
0.00
{
i
2001 2002 2003 2004 2D05
Year
Herbivores
*to
Q
0.5-
0.0
I 2
5
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Figure F-21. Temporal trends in fish assemblages in VMS, St. John
St. Croix Monitoring
October 16 -30, 2005
All Species
Figure F-22. Spatial patterns of episodic bleaching - Buck Island, St. Croix
72 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Data were collected to monitor the bleaching event in October 2005 and several months later
(December 2005) to determine longer-term impacts. Overall, bleached coral cover decreased
by 44.7% in areas from October to December 2005, however, bleaching and apparent
recovering corals were still evident. Bleached cover decreased by 60% or more in several
abundant corals (e.g., Diploria strigosa, Porites astreoides, Montastraea annularis, Acropora
palmata. and Millepora spp.). These corals also showed an increase in the occurrence of
unbleached colonies between October and December 2005 (Figure F-23). Less abundant corals
such as D. labyrinthiformis and Mycetophyllia spp. showed a decrease in bleached coral cover
and a corresponding increase in normal coral cover (unbleached coloration).
Figure F-23. Episodic bleaching - Buck Island, St. Croix. Photos show the top four most
bleached corals in October 2005 (clockwise): Diploria strigosa (61% bleached), Montastraea
annularis (93% bleached), Acropora palmata (23% bleached) and Porites astreoides
(43% bleached).
Data Storage and Availability
NOAA makes all the data available online at:
http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/biogeography/prod table.aspx after they have completed
their quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) process.
Freshwater BioaSSeSSment LeSSOns: Wayne Davis, USEPA, Office of Environmental
Information
The U.S. CWA was enacted to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological
integrity of the Nation's waters. Biological integrity means a natural, fully functioning living
system of organisms and communities plus the processes that generate and maintain them.
The living system incorporates a variety of scales — from individuals to landscapes — and is
embedded in a dynamic evolutionary and biogeographic context (Karr 2006). To achieve this
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 73
-------
objective, the Act sets out several national goals, including the protection and propagation of
fish, shellfish and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.
Key provisions of the CWA include water quality standards (designated uses, anti-degradation
policy, and criteria), National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), water quality-
based effluent limitations for point sources, and biennial reporting to Congress. Water quality
standards and permitting requirements provide a legal mandate for progress.
Biological assessments are evaluations of the condition of waterbodies using surveys and other
direct measurements of resident biological organisms (macroinvertebrates, fish, and plants).
Biological assessments reflect the integrated effects of multiple and cumulative stressors,
detect impairment that might be missed by physical and chemical criteria (e.g., overfishing or
habitat loss), and resonate with managers and stakeholders.
EPA scientists began development of freshwater bioassessment methods in the 1980s. Ohio,
Maine and Oregon played key roles in early methods development. In 1987 EPA held the first
national workshop on bioassessment and biocriteria. There were many issues to overcome:
scientists had favorite indicator assemblages (fish, bugs, algae), different sampling methods
(electrofishing, dip nets, gill nets), and different sampling designs (fixed station, expert
judgment, random).
Pilot studies paved the way (e.g., Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment [MAIA], Western
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program). Bioassessments are now used by most
states to directly support programmatic management needs (e.g., NPDES permits, 305b
reporting for designated uses, superfund, and other local issues) (Figure F-24). Most states use
more than one assemblage for bioassessment. There is now much greater consistency in
methods and analysis, and the random probabilistic design has become popular. However,
targeted monitoring is still utilized to address certain questions (i.e., How is sediment affecting
corals at a particular location?), as are fixed stations (i.e., What are the trends in coral cover
overtime?).
70
60
I Stt
(X 40
I 20
Ift
II
52
[] Total Programs
• Use
D In Process
• Do Not Use
1995
2001
Figure F-24. Freshwater bioassessment programs in use in U.S. states
74 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Bioassessments can be used to address questions about existing and/or baseline conditions,
trends, impacts from discharge, evaluation of Best Management Practices, and reference
conditions. Multiple programs can benefit from the same data. We can build upon the lessons
learned from freshwater bioassessment to develop comparable coral reef monitoring
programs.
Bioassessment Protocols for Regulatory Protection of Coral Reefs:
Bill Fisher, USEPA, ORD
Coral reef managers have traditionally employed "in-the-water" management (e.g., marine
protected areas to restrict fishing, boating and tourism), managing for recovery (e.g., the
Endangered Species Act), or managing for resilience (e.g., identification and propagation of
resilient populations and habitats). Biological assessments and development of Water Quality
Standards are additional tools available for coral reef management. CWA bioassessments are
applicable to anthropogenic stressors only and the thresholds (criteria) are based on expected
or desired condition of the resource. Bioassessments provide meaningful biological information
that is transparent to stakeholders.
However, bioassessments can be costly. A cost effective method is the rapid bioassessment
protocol (RBP) that allows the survey of multiple sites in a field season. RBPs are scientifically
valid and defensible for regulatory action. They also allow for quick analysis of data and
application in management decisions. The data collection is environmentally benign (non-
destructive) (Barbour et al. 1999).
A first step for evaluating indicators is to determine the question(s) to be answered and the
taxonomic assemblages that are important both for characterizing biological condition and
communicating reef value to stakeholders. Coral reefs provide a variety of ecosystem services,
including ecological value (e.g., habitat for fish and invertebrates, biodiversity, etc.) and
economic value (e.g., tourism and recreation, fishing, shoreline protection and bio-mining).
For EPA biocriteria purposes, information about the value of ecosystem services (e.g., relative
importance of different regions, reefs, and species; importance relative to human impact
activities; and meaningful thresholds for stakeholders) and biological sustainability, e.g., kind
(taxa richness, ecological role, composition) and amount (abundance, size) are important.
Directly or indirectly, all reef ecosystem services depend on stony corals. As covered in earlier
presentations, there are several historical methods for monitoring stony corals, some of which
are colony focused (composition and abundance/density), some surface-area focused
(composition and 2D planar surface area for coral cover), and some include supplementary
information (e.g., 'rugosity' measurements for topographic complexity, partial mortality).
As a first step, EPA developed a rapid bioassessment protocol (RBP) for stony corals (Fisher
2007), which uses only three underwater observations - species identification, colony size and
proportion of live tissue. The RBP combines historical approaches, but uniquely documents
surface area in 3D rather than a planar surface area, which does not account for coral height or
complexity. Indicators from 3D surface area estimates can be used to produce a variety of
metrics relevant to reef management and linked to coral value and sustainability (Figure F-25).
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 75
-------
Colony Identification
Abundance '
Density
Taxa -
Richness
Community
Composition
Relative Spp
Abundance
Species
Diversity
Population
Structure
Community
Structure
Colony Size % Live Tissue
Surface Area —i— Colony %LT
Total 3D SA Avg %LT
Total 3D
Coral Cover
Live 3D SA
Live 3D Coral
Cover
Size-Related
Condition
% Live Coral
Figure F-25. Indicators that can be derived from the EPA stony coral RBP
The three-dimensional (3D) size and structure of corals are directly related to many ecosystem
values and functions. EPA developed and compared three different approaches for estimating
total, 3D coral colony surface area of hemispherical stony corals: 1) ranking colonies into
volumetric size classes, 2) hemisphere models, and 3) log-linear models (Courtney et al. 2007).
Dimensional measurements taken using the Stony Coral RBP could be applied in either the
log-linear or hemisphere models, with the log-linear model tending toward greater accuracy
(Figure F-26).
Figure F-26. Photograph of Diploria strigosa colony. (A) Aluminum bars and billiard balls
(arrows) are used for spatial reference and scaling. Reference points at specific features of the
colony are identified on at least three separate images and joined to form contour lines and
surface panels. From these, the colony is digitally reconstructed in three dimensions. (B) Very
accurate colony dimensions and surface area measurements can be made. (C) Final 3D digital
model (Courtney et al. 2007).
76 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
EPA Coral Monitoring Update - Steps Toward Biocriteria: Leska Fore,
Statistical Design
EPA conducted field studies in the Florida Keys and St. Croix, USVI to evaluate the Stony Coral
RBP for development of biocriteria (Fore et al. 2006a and b). In the USVI, divers from the EPA
and the USVI Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) collected physical measurements and
recorded the condition of coral colonies at 61 reef stations (Figure F-27). The objectives were to
test, develop, and apply coral monitoring protocols that record the coral species, the percent
living tissue, and the size of each coral colony within a radial belt transect. Data collected from
this collaboration were intended to resolve questions about the appropriate size of the
sampling unit, the process for randomly selecting sampling units, the natural variability
associated with habitat types and coastal management zones, and the association between
coral metrics and human influence (Fore et al. 2006b).
USVI 3D Coral Sampling Stations - Feb 2006
SIB
*****!,»,
SHI
'
*•
*»
jPp
?*., ' NKT
^T r'
trjps"
- ««.-V^
"
HE I)
f-
S!£.fl
rw
4*>
utjiTiwrt 5-33C6 0118
Figure F-27. EPA sampling stations (61) around St. Croix, USVI, in 2006 evaluation of EPA
stony coral RBP
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 77
-------
USVI Division of Environmental Protection and DPNR resource managers and scientists defined
seven coastal management zones (CMZ). The zones were defined according to the type of coral
habitat observed and the type of human land use within the water, along the shore and inland.
Thus, given historic land uses, expectations may differ according to CMZ (Figure F-28).
St. Croix US Virgin Islands
Management zones - coral reef habitat
Buck Island Reef NM
I
Northwest
•TunsnVdrv ing
IN
A
EastNSS-
Manne Park
Legend
I I Management zones
— Col«n»d B*dr«k
Colonized Pavement
Colorazed Paw«m*nt with Sand Channels
Linear Reef
Patch RMI (Ajofft^atwdJ
Parch R*«* (Individual)
Scattered Cora I'Roek in Unconsolidsted Sediment
Spui and Groove Reef
Figure F-28. Seven coastal management zones were defined by USVI managers and scientists
To develop biocriteria, a clear link must be demonstrated between the monitoring tools used to
summarize data (e.g., metrics) and an independent measure of site condition or human
disturbance. Three potential disturbance gradients were identified for the human disturbance
analysis - the City of Christiansted, the West end commercial docks, the City of Frederiksted,
and the South side commercial docks and industrial area (Figure F-29).
Figure F-29. EPA reef station locations along the south side commercial area of St. Croix, USVI.
The ship channel and docks run along the red dashed line.
78 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
For this sampling design, a total of 20 stations are required: 10 along the gradient, 5 at every
other location as a replicate, and 5 at every other location in a different habitat type (Figure
F-30). The eight primary indicators (Table F-6) were individually tested for association with each
of the three human disturbance gradients. These included taxa richness, colony density,
average colony surface area, coefficient of variation of colony surface area, total coral cover,
average percent live tissue, live coral cover, and percent live surface area. The primary
indicators were calculated from all colonies documented at each station.
Industrial area
Stations
Replicates
Different habitat
o o
Area of disturbance -100 m
Figure F-30. A proposed sampling along a gradient of human disturbance
Table F-6. Stony coral indicators (adapted from Fisher 2007)
Definitions
Colony surface area (CSA): derived for each colony using a 3D hemispheric surrogate (m2)
Percent live tissue (%LT): estimated for each colony
Total surface area (TSA) = SCSA
Live surface area (LSA) = CSA x (%LT/100)
Primary Stony Coral Indicators
Species (taxa) richness: number of species occurring at a station or location
Colony density: number of colonies/m2 sea floor
Average colony surface area (AvCSA) = SCSA/# colonies
Colony size coefficient of variation (CSA-CV) = standard deviation CSA/mean CSA
Total Coral Cover (TC) = TSA/m2 sea floor
Average Percent Live Tissue (Av%LT) = S%LT/#colonies
Live Coral Cover (LC) = S LSA/m2 sea floor
Percent live surface area3 (%LSA) = [LSA/TSA] x 100
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 79
-------
In the area with the highest human disturbance, four metrics were highly correlated with
distance from an industrial point source: total (3D) surface area of coral, total live surface area,
taxa richness, and average colony size (Table F-7). Average colony size provides information on
reef structural complexity, population structure and even historical condition. Total surface
area and total live surface area can be used to characterize colony health and potential for
growth and reproduction (Fisher et al. 2008). The variance associated with different dive teams
was quite small for all seven candidate metrics compared to variance due to transect location,
station, and zone (Fisher et al. 2008).
Table F-7. Stony coral metric testing. Columns show the candidate metrics for stony coral,
description of measurement, and whether the metric was significantly correlated with a
gradient of human disturbance.
Candidate metric
Measurement
SL Croix
Abundance and Composition
Coral density
Species richness
Species frequency
Unique species
Tolerant richness
Intolerant richness
Number of corals per m?
Number of species
Number occurrences
Number of taxa that are rare,
unique or protected
Number of taxa
Number of taxa
Decrease
Depends
on species
Physical Stature
Reef surface area
Reef structure
Community
topographic complexity
Total 3D surface area (m?} of corals
Total volume (m3) of corals per m7
Coefficient of variation for coral
colony surface area
Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Biological Condition
Reef percent live coral
Reef live surface area
Reef live to dead
surface area
Average percent live coral for all
colonies
Sum of live colony surface areas
for all colonies
Ratio of live to dead coral surface
area for all colonies
Decrease
In 2007, EPA and USVI conducted a regional assessment based upon probabilistic sampling
(Figure F-31). Probabilistic sampling is:
• A sample where every element (site) of the population has a known probability of being
randomly selected.
• Any element could be in the sample.
• Probability (random) sampling prevents bias in estimating condition
• Probability sampling allows us to infer condition of unsampled sites
80 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Randomly selected locations were spread evenly across the hard bottom substrate occurring at
<12m depth and within 1.5 km of shore. Data were still being analyzed at the time of the
workshop - results were published in Fisher et al. (2014). From the probabilistic survey, it is
possible to calculate what percentage of reef area supports designated uses.
• in
Si. Croix. USVl 2007
Coral Snmplmfj D««ign
3
ButMilOTll
j^-.j •
V- ~ •
i-
Figure F-31. Station locations for a probabilistic survey design conducted by EPA in St. Croix,
USVl, in 2007
Appendix F. Summaries of Workshop Presentations | 81
-------
-------
Appendix G. Draft USVI Objectives Hierarchy
An objective's hierarchy is a formalized method to identify, describe, and structure the key
objectives stemming from the decision context (Gregory and Keeney 2002). An objectives
hierarchy organizes objectives from broad, overarching goals (fundamental objectives) to
narrower, more specific objectives (means objectives). This formal structure allows us to view
each alternative in context of the broader objective to which it contributes, and also to more
the specific objectives that contribute to it (Bradley et al. 2013).
EPA developed a draft objectives hierarchy for the USVI, drawing from several sources. The first
is the USVI Coastal Zone Management (VICZM) Act, Section 903(b), which states the basic goals
for USVI coastal zones (see Chapter 2).
The second source is the proceedings report from an EPA-sponsored Assessment Workshop
held September 11-13, 2007, in St. Croix, USVI, where key coral reef managers (federal and
territorial) met with EPA research scientists and developed a suite of management objectives,
subobjectives, and related assessment questions (see Chapter 2).
The third source is a priority-setting document developed by NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation
Program (CRCP) through a collaborative process with core USVI coral reef managers. NOAA and
the core managers developed a framework of goals and objectives (Appendix H).
The fourth source is the First Annual Centennial Strategy for the Buck Island Reef National
Monument (Appendix I); the fifth source is the First Annual Centennial Strategy for Virgin
Islands National Park (Appendix J); and the sixth source is the First Annual Centennial Strategy
for the Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument (Appendix K). These documents were
developed by the Park Superintendents, as part of the National Park Service Centennial
Initiative to prepare national parks for a second century of conservation, preservation and
enjoyment.
The seventh source is the St. Croix East End Marine Park Management Plan (Appendix L). The
Nature Conservancy (TNC) held a series of community workshops in 2001 with broad
stakeholder participation to develop the management strategies and action plans. Based on the
information gathered at these workshops, TNC developed this plan for the Virgin Islands
Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Zone Management in 2002.
A crosswalk showing the objectives and their sources is shown in Appendix M.
Draft USVI Objectives Hierarchy
Overall objective: Manage coastal resources to improve quality of life in the USVI
1. Maximize the ecological integrity of environmental resources
a. Maximize ecosystem connectivity and linkages (abundance of anadromous fish
species/adjacency of corals, mangroves, salt ponds, and seagrass beds)
Appendix G. Draft USVI Objectives Hierarchy | 83
-------
b. Maximize the ecological integrity of coastal aquatic habitats
i. Maximize the integrity of seagrass habitats (seagrass area/seagrass density/quality
of seagrass species)
ii. Maximize the integrity of mangrove habitats (mangrove area/mangrove
density/quality of mangrove species)
iii. Maximize the integrity of salt pond habitats (salt pond area/salt pond
density/quality of salt pond species)
c. Maximize the ecological integrity of saltwater/marine aquatic habitats
i. Maximize the integrity of open ocean habitats (benthic habitat area &
quality/surface water habitat area & quality/water column habitat area & quality)
ii. Maximize the integrity of coral reef ecosystems
1. Maximize the integrity of coral species (coral diversity/living coral area/coral
growth rate/coral-algal index/ft of recruits/adult survival)
2. Maximize the integrity of coral reef-associated organisms (species
diversity/abundance and number of rare or imperiled species)
2. Maximize economic benefits
a. Minimize costs of environmental resource management (project cost in U.S. $)
b. Promote economic development and growth in the coastal zone
i. Maximize coastal-dependent development over other development in the
coastal zone
ii. Reserve areas suitable for commercial and industrial uses
c. Maximize economic benefit from tourism
i. Maximize visitation (# of single day trips per year/ # of multiple day trips per year)
ii. Maximize contributions to the local economy (average visitor expenditures/tax
revenues)
d. Maximize sustainable fisheries
i. Maximize the economic benefit from fisheries (abundance of harvestable
fish/number of harvestable species/financial revenue from fishing/fishing effort)
ii. Maximize the quality of foods from fisheries (nutritional value/contaminant
concentrations)
e. Minimize damage from floods
i. Minimize the erosion of beaches (erosion rate/economic costs of erosion)
ii. Minimize damage to coastal properties (economic costs from flooding)
iii. Minimize damage to inland properties (economic costs from flooding)
f. Minimize damage from storms (predicted wave attenuation)
g. Minimize the economic losses from human illnesses (loss of earnings due to
illnesses/medical expenses)
84 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
3. Enhance the social well-being of USVI residents
a. Maximize the cultural benefits from usage of natural resources
i. Maximize the environmental justice of decisions affecting resources
(proportion of ethnic groups detrimentally affected/proportion of low income
citizens detrimentally affected)
ii. Preserve the historical nature of resources
1. Traditional uses (area preserved)
2. Folklore (area preserved)
3. Archeological uses (area preserved)
4. Religious uses (area preserved)
b. Maximize the aesthetic value of the environmental resources (public value scale/expert
value scale)
c. Maximize recreational opportunities (# of recreational facilities/ft of visitors)
d. Maximize the opportunities for local resident engagement in management tasks
(volunteer opportunities)
e. Maximize the equitable benefits from decisions (balance of costs/benefits of decisions
to stakeholder groups)
4. Minimize the threats to human health
a. Minimize injuries from floods (mortality/morbidity)
b. Minimize human health risks from chemicals (mortality/morbidity)
c. Minimize illnesses from waterborne pathogens (mortality/morbidity)
5. Maximize learning opportunities from decisions
a. Enhance local understanding of environmental processes
i. Maximize experiential interactions with the wildlife (# of residents impacted)
ii. Maximize educational opportunities (# of students impacted)
iii. Effectively communicate risks of declining environment to human well-being
(# of citizens impacted)
b. Reduce uncertainty on environmental status and trends (Value of information)
c. Maximize public participation in decisions affecting coastal planning conservation
and development
d. Maximize the use of information in decision processes (# of experimental learning
opportunities/future decision quality/improved data integration)
e. Maximize management performance (timing/security/efficacy/adaptability)
6. Meet political and legislative requirements in decision-making tasks (priority level/ft of
legislative goals obtained that are not covered in the objectives)
Appendix G. Draft USVI Objectives Hierarchy | 85
-------
-------
Appendix H. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation
Program, US Virgin Islands Coral Reef
Management Priorities
GOAL 1: Reduce impacts to coral reef ecosystems by reducing
terrestrial sediment and pollutant inputs and improving water quality.
Objectives:
1. Define and identify priority watersheds and develop management plans, stormwater plans
and restoration projects that reduce the effects of contaminants and poor water quality on
reef resources.
2. Develop and apply USVI-specific best management practices and adaptive management
plans as necessary throughout the territory (e.g., installation of culverts, catch basins,
vegetative buffers, etc.).
3. Support the development and implementation of new and stricter development permit
conditions that include strong mitigation actions, avoidance, minimization of impacts and
compensation. Conditions should also give consideration to cumulative impacts of stressors,
including existing and expected development, and other stressors.
4. Ensure that the necessary and consistent regulatory and programmatic framework exists and
is enforced to implement watershed management strategies necessary to protect coral
ecosystems.
5. Determine the effects of contaminants and poor water quality on reef resources and develop
and apply best management practices as necessary. Understand water quality status and
trends resulting from land-based sources of pollution so that best practices can be
formulated and applied in priority areas.
6. Develop coral reef-specific water quality standards and identify threshold values that can be
incorporated into the permit process and marine management in general.
7. Build partnerships among local, state, federal and nongovernmental entities to identify,
leverage and apply financial and other resources to facilitate improved coastal and upland
watershed management.
8. Support a well-informed decision-making process for granting construction permits, ensuring
that decision-makers and permit-review staff have access to technical information and
known best management practices to mitigate impacts on water quality. Present this in a
manner suitable for the audience type.
9. Support the establishment of a policy that requires "no net loss" of any additional natural
coastal features that would reduce and retain runoff, including coastal ponds, mangrove
systems, etc.
10. Support an upgrade to the sewage infrastructure to increase capacity of processing plants,
improve the collection and delivery system and upgrade individual/household Individual
Septic Disposal Systems (ISDS).
Appendix H. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program | 87
-------
11. Develop stormwater management plans for each area of jurisdiction in the USVI.
12. Provide education and outreach to upper level leadership (DPNR, public works, other
commissions) and government house, legislators, CZM Commission, etc., on the economic
value of coral reef resources and the importance of reducing impacts of land-based sources
of pollution on them.
GOAL 2: Develop and implement a comprehensive education and
outreach program to create buy-in and build public support for an
effective coral reef conservation program that targets resource users,
general public and decision-makers.
Objectives:
1. Convey the importance and economic value of the reef to key constituencies and measure
their understanding of the effect of human impacts, such as overfishing, pollution, etc., on
this value.
2. Ensure public support for resource management actions by hosting conferences, workshops
and making school presentations. This outreach program should enable stewardship at all
levels of society to affect long-term behavioral change.
• Develop communication strategies and tools and identify priority target audiences.
• Support programs that connect youth classroom experience with field experience. Build
from existing programs and curricula such as the Math & Environmental Science
Academy and the proposed Reef Rangers.
• Create opportunities to keep coral reef stewards who were nurtured in the youth
programs engaged in coral reef conservation, policy and advocacy (e.g., internships,
university curriculum, and coral scholarships).
3. Emphasize transfer of information and research findings to the general public, developers
and decision-makers.
GOAL 3: Increase the ability to effectively enforce existing rules,
regulations and laws.
Objectives:
1. Maintain sufficient law enforcement staff and enforce regulations on priority rules and
regulations, such as development practices, permit conditions, MPA regulations and
fisheries regulations.
2. Develop and provide incentive mechanisms for enforcement programs and enforcement
officers to keep existing staff and attract new staff.
3. Provide cross training between science and management departments and enforcement
officers to increase enforcement capacity and enable cross-enforcement of existing
regulations.
88 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
4. Determine the success of existing enforcement efforts and management measures that are
already in place to build on what works. This includes the determination of success for
compatible regulations established in state waters and the territory's ability to enforce them.
This may also include a gap assessment to determine where enforcement is currently
directed compared to issues presented in this document.
5. Inform and educate judicial and legislative decision-makers to increase support for law
enforcement actions.
6. To create separation between enforcement officials and resource users, consider bringing in
outside enforcement presence (e.g., exchanges, temporary assignments, etc.) to focus on
priority enforcement issues.
7. Provide training along with education and field materials to enforcement officers.
8. Develop and implement outreach and education strategies in partnership with other
agencies and programs to work with user groups to increase compliance and reduce the
need for enforcement.
9. Work with user groups to promote public support and compliance through workshops,
orientations, provision of reporting hotlines and service as interpretive guides.
GOAL 4: Reduce fishing impacts on critical stocks that most directly
affect the health and resilience of the reef ecosystem
Objectives for Licensed Fisheries (Commercial):
1. Reduce fishing effort on prioritized key coral reef associated species or functional groups
(e.g., herbivores, juveniles, apex predators, etc.).
2. Reduce the use of inappropriate gear and fishing in marine protection areas (MPAs)
by strengthening local enforcement and through educational efforts.
3. Improve commercial fisheries record-keeping and fisher compliance by developing and
implementing an effective mechanism to improve the current data-gathering process.
4. Clarify jurisdictional-specific fishery management responsibilities and collaborate to ensure
effective implementation.
5. Improve understanding of the current status of fisheries resources and patterns of fishing
effort through collaboration with local and federal researchers pursuing management-driven
fisheries science.
6. Build comparative USVI fisheries health trend data through studies that identify behaviors of
present fishery status and trends within the USVI and throughout the region, including
studies comparing managed areas to unmanaged areas and managed stocks to similar
unmanaged stocks.
7. Develop and implement effective strategies created and enforced by fishers to identify,
understand and apply fisheries self-management practices
Appendix H. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program | 89
-------
Objectives for Unlicensed (Recreational) Fisheries:
8. Obtain the necessary information to understand the impacts of recreational fisheries in
the USVI.
9. Continue to develop and implement a recreational license program with associated
legislation for recreational fishing regulations and clear requirements and authorities for
monitoring and enforcement.
10. Incorporate a mandated sampling program to gauge the status of recreational fisheries.
Objectives for All Fisheries (Licensed and Unlicensed):
11. Understand ecological connectivity through dispersal of eggs and larvae to identify key
sources and sinks; assess connectivity between existing and potential MPAs and between
spawning aggregations and juvenile habitat to identify resilient areas for protection.
12. Support the effective implementation of MPAs.
13. Assess the effectiveness of MPAs in meeting their stated management goals.
14. Understand the social impacts of legislation and regulatory actions on the fishing
community and identify alternatives to mitigate the negative impacts of these actions.
15. Develop and implement enhanced tools to preserve and restore fisheries resources.
GOAL 5: Manage for resilience to climate change and related effects,
including impact of elevated sea temperature; sea level rise; acidifica-
tion and calcium carbonate dissolution; hurricane intensity/frequency
and sedimentation to promote recovery of reefs from previous events
Objectives:
1. Support more research on and better understanding of the following issues that are
priorities for USVI given this management goal:
• Coral diseases (understanding of the holobiont and dynamics of the health gradient in
the holobiont, etiology).
• Relationship between bleaching and disease.
• Coral resistance to bleaching and disease.
• Cumulative effects of multiple stressors.
• Resilience following global, regional and local stressors.
• Possible effects of climate change on coral reefs and associated ecosystems.
• Physiological tolerances and predicted shifts in species distributions.
• Currents; distribution patterns and source of stressors; distribution and sources of seed.
• Thresholds for stressors (i.e., sediment, pollutants, temps, etc.) above which
health/resiliency of holobiont becomes compromised.
• Short- and long-term effects of stressors on coral reef ecosystem (as a whole and
ecosystem function).
90 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
2. Identify areas of high resilience and sources of juveniles/recruits of coral species for
additional protection.
3. Create and implement a coordinated response and restoration strategy for physical
disturbances (i.e., storms, vessel impacts, etc.) to increase recovery of affected coral reef
ecosystems. Identify means of communication with managers in neighboring islands to alert
of disturbance events, leverage resources, etc.
4. Develop and incorporate into management/regulatory strategies coral reef ecosystem water
quality standards.
5. Provide training opportunities to coral reef managers to increase their understanding of the
impacts of climate change on coral reef ecosystems; the predicted range and uncertainty
of changes that will occur; and management strategies, tools and technologies to assess risk
and mitigate adverse impacts of climate change and related stressors (includes training a
coordinated response team).
6. Consider closing areas when bleaching and disease or hurricane damages are extensive to
allow for the recovery of reef areas. (In the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, areas
have been closed to the public when bleaching has been severe).
7. Create a mechanism to incorporate knowledge into management action and policy
(i.e., MPAs, closures, permit conditions, etc.).
8. Establish and maintain a contingency fund to respond to severe bleaching events.
9. Develop a detection and reporting program to involve citizens in detecting bleaching events
as well as other disturbances, such as pollution, storm damage and groundings.
10. Create and implement a mechanism to increase communication between regional resource
managers (PR, Culebra, BVI, etc.) to alert to disturbance events, leverage resources, etc.
GOAL 6: Improve and enable coordination and communication
among USVI Coral Reef Practitioners
Objectives:
1. Implement and strengthen the VI Coral Reef Advisory Group (VICRAG) as a mechanism
for improved cooperation and collaborative action to conserve and manage the coral reef
ecosystems of the USVI.
2. Develop and implement specific mechanisms to enable improved communications between
the coral reef science and coral reef management communities in the USVI and to provide
current science-based information and recommendations for management action.
3. Develop and implement specific mechanisms to enable improved cooperation between
permitting authorities at the local, territorial and federal government levels to minimize
development impacts to the coral reef ecosystems of the USVI.
Appendix H. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program | 91
-------
GOAL 7: Reduce other sources of marine pollution and human impacts
from areas that are most critical to coral reef protection and resilience
Objectives:
1. Work with the territorial government and the private sector to install and maintain vessel
pumpout systems that are available and easily accessible for recreational vessels. (Access
federal funds through the Clean Vessel Act and Boating Infrastructure Grant).
2. Reduce marine debris and coastal debris by both implementing strategies to reduce the
production of debris and by implementing debris cleanup activities.
3. Reduce boat and anchor damage to coral reefs by installing and maintaining mooring buoys,
navigational aids and markers.
4. Provide education and outreach to promote use of and compliance with vessel pumpout
systems, mooring buoys, navigational aids and markers and to reduce the production of
marine and coastal debris.
5. Prepare for vessel groundings and oil spills. Develop standard operating procedures for
responding to disasters that include specific roles for law enforcement and resource
management employees that are consistent with existing guidance and procedures for oil
spills and other hazards and grounding response programs.
6. Develop a USVI ballast water policy to reduce negative impacts to coral reef systems.
7. Support effective implementation of existing and developing Clean Marina and Blue Flag
programs for the USVI to encourage clean and environmentally compatible marinas, boating
activities and coastal resource use.
GOAL 8: Protect against, prepare for and control/manage invasive
species
Objectives:
1. Research and compile lessons-learned from affected locations (impacts, methods, etc.).
2. Monitor and predict possible distribution and movement (includes predictive modeling
based on lessons-learned from other areas).
3. Monitor effects of invasive species, such as Lionfish.
4. Prepare, implement and fund a response strategy, including standard operating procedures
for invasive species (defines how agencies, public, etc., react and respond).
5. Generate incentives to encourage public/resource user identification and removal of
invasive species.
6. Encourage/establish regional work groups to identify patterns of spread and distribution;
communicate lessons-learned; control species movement.
92 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix I. Buck Island Reef National Monument
(BUIS) Centennial Strategy
Vision Statement
Buck Island Reef National Monument's mission is to protect, preserve, manage, and interpret
the monument's seascapes, scenic views, and unique natural and cultural resources unimpaired
for the education, enjoyment and inspiration of present and future generations.
The park purpose is to: 1) preserve and protect the island and tropical marine ecosystem
including coral reefs, sea grass beds octocoral hard bottom, sand communities, algal plains,
shelf edge, and oceanic habitats; 2) protect threatened and endangered species and enhance
their habitats and survivability; 3) enhance the health and diversity of fisheries resources
through their protection; 4) protect and manage terrestrial and submerged cultural resources;
and 5) preserve this area of outstanding scientific, aesthetic, and educational importance for
the benefit and enjoyment of the people now and for the future.
The centennial vision for Salt River Bay will further support marine research and education at
Buck Island Reef National Monument (the National Park Service's first fully protected area).
Appendix I. BUIS Centennial Strategy | 93
-------
-------
Appendix J. Virgin Islands National Park
Centennial Strategy
Vision Statement
Established in 1956, Virgin Islands National Park comprises slightly more than half of the Island
of St. John Island. In 1962, Congress expanded the boundary to include 5,650 acres of
submerged lands to protect and preserve the coral reefs and seascapes. And, in 1978 the
legislation was amended to add Hassel Island, six acres in the Red Hook, and four acres at the
Wintberg Estate on St. Thomas.
VMS protects internationally significant marine and terrestrial resources. Within its borders lie
protected bays of crystal blue-green waters and an abundance of coral reef life, white sandy
beaches shaded by seagrape trees, coconut palms, and tropical forests providing habitat for
over 800 species of plants. The park's cultural resources are significant in the settlement and
colonization of the New World, maritime history and commerce, and African-American history,
including artifacts from the Pre-Colombian Amerindian civilization, remains of the Danish
Colonial sugar plantations, and reminders of African slavery and the subsistence culture that
followed during the 100 years after emancipation.
The Centennial vision of Virgin Islands National Park is to expand valuable research, projects,
and activities critical for the protection of the diverse and complex system of park's coral reefs,
which are some of the most biologically rich and economically important coral reef resources in
the world; to continue participation in partnerships and to explore other opportunities; and to
increase public education and appreciation of the park's history, and participation and
stewardship in the preservation of the park's resources.
Objectives
1. Provide inspiring, safe, and accessible places for people to enjoy- the standard to which
all other park systems aspire. VMS provides access to numerous tropical marine and
terrestrial ecosystems and historic plantation era resources. This is accomplished through
overlooks, trails, beaches, boat moorings, and historic sites. All are maintained to provide
safe access to the resources for the enjoyment and inspiration of our visitors.
2. Improve the condition of park resources and assets.
a. Rehabilitate high-priority historic buildings to good condition, and help communities to
preserve their history through programs like Preserve America. VMS has over 500 historic
structures that date to the Caribbean plantation era. Currently, 247 of those are on the List
of Classified Structures. Current funding only allows for rehabilitation and maintenance of
four sites encompassing approximately 20 structures. Proper stewardship of the park's
cultural resources includes ensuring that at least these four sites are in good condition, all
museum collection protection and preservation standards are met, and that the park's
archeological sites are in good condition. The park is partnering with the Friends of VINP and
the St. Thomas Historic Trust to rehabilitate the Creque Marine Railway on Hassel Island, the
oldest and longest operating marine railway in the Caribbean. Meeting these goals will
require funding of numerous PMIS projects and support from local NGOs and volunteers.
Appendix J. Virgin Islands National Park Centennial Strategy | 95
-------
b. Restore native habitats by controlling invasive species and reintroducing key plant and
animal species. VMS has commenced reducing the populations of feral animals and exotic
plants on parklands. Due to the interrelationship within holdings and adjacent lands, this will
be an ongoing effort. While the park has identified the distribution and abundance of feral
and exotic species, it will require additional funding of OFS and PMIS requests to accomplish
results that will have significant impact to native species. The reduction of exotic plant
species has been accomplished through the South Florida/Caribbean Exotic Plant
Management Team (EPMT). Eradication of these species requires periodic retreatment,
which is dependent on continued funding of the EPMT.
c. Improve high-priority assets to acceptable condition, as measured by the Facility
Condition Index. The Trunk Bay Sugar Factory is a historic structure (circa 1780) that is listed
on the National Register of Historic Places (81000088) and appears on the List of Classified
Structures for the park. The stabilization of the masonry walls is critical to preventing
structural collapse and the loss of significant historic fabric. The preservation and
interpretation of this contributing structure to the Colonial Plantation Era is one of the park's
management objectives. The structures close proximity to Trunk Bay beach, which can
receive upwards of a thousand visitors a day makes this historic resource a crucial element in
interpreting the story of the Colonial System on St. John. However, this close proximity to so
many visitors threatens public safety. These architecturally significant and fairly high, over
fifty feet tall masonry walls are deteriorating rapidly and will collapse in the very near future
if stabilization efforts are not addressed. Completion of the project will eliminate a serious
threat to visitor safety as well as restore and preserve one of the park's most valuable assets.
d. Improve the natural resources in parks, as measured by the vital signs developed under
the Natural Resource Challenge. Vital Signs for VMS have been identified through the South
Florida/Caribbean Inventory and Monitoring Program. Park staff and other collaborators
(NOAA, universities, and scientists) are monitoring water and air quality, coral reef health,
reef fish populations, tropical forest dynamics, seagrass dynamics, sea turtles, etc.
Approximately 215 moorings in park waters are enabling recovery of seagrass communities
in many bays. And marine resource protection patrols prevent damage to coral reefs from
illegal anchoring and prevent loss of endangered species (3 species of sea turtles) by
poaching or nesting disturbance. Continued funding of the I&M Program and funding of
several PMIS projects are necessary to ensure continued improvement of natural resources
in VMS.
e. Complete all cultural resource inventories for designated priority resources. VMS along
with VICR are unique as they preserve one of the most diverse collections of cultural and
natural resources in the nation. Within the parks are resources that are essential to the
maritime history of the Caribbean. The remains of hundreds of historic structures found
throughout VMS are critical to the preservation of Virgin Islands history as they represent the
full range of historic themes including military fortifications, plantations, slavery, hospitals,
and maritime industry. The large numbers of prehistoric sites in the park span the range of
human occupation in the Caribbean and are some of the best preserved in the Nation. The
significant ceremonial sites make them critical in the understanding the Caribbean's
prehistoric past. Curatorial needs include proper dedicated storage and display, timely
96 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
accessioning and cataloging, systematic routine housekeeping and maintenance, and pest
control. In order to give the collections the care they deserve and require to meet NFS
standards, a museum curatorial technician is required.
f. The Park's greatest need in resource protection and visitor safety is to reduce impacts
caused by boating visitors and to maintain boat exclusion zones to protect swimmers.
Installation of new navigational aids and buoys will accomplish this goal. Resource protection
buoys, 125 regulatory buoys, 300 moorings will be installed and maintained. Implementation
of these measures and new actions will mitigate human activities that are causing a rapid
degradation of coral reef and seagrass ecosystems. A consistent and properly funded
maintenance program for all buoys in VMS waters provides for visitor safety, resource
protection, and a reduction in liability and tort claims. Mooring buoys assist novice boaters
while preventing anchor or chain damage to benthic communities, regulatory buoys prevent
boats from running aground on coral reefs, and boundary buoys clearly demarcate VMS
waters, alerting unfamiliar visitors that they are within a National Park. This would protect
the existing National Park Service investment in buoys while safeguarding the unique natural
resources of the VMS.
3. Serve as the preeminent resource laboratory by applying excellence in science and
scholarship to understand and respond to environmental changes. VMS is the site of many
seminal research efforts in the Caribbean, starting in the early 1950s. VMS strives to solicit
and encourage scientific research in both natural and cultural fields to better understand the
processes and dynamics involved in tropical biology and ecology. Considerable work is being
done at VMS in understanding changes in coral reef ecosystems as it relates to changes in
local, regional and global variables. Changes in dry tropical forests due to hurricanes and
seasonal rainfall patterns, coral reef changes due to bleaching and disease, and changes in
reef fish populations due to habitat changes and fishing pressures are being monitored to
better understand and respond to environmental changes.
4. Encourage children to be future conservationists. VMS has employed an Education
Coordinator to work with the local schools and education groups to carry the park's message
to the schools and facilitate school children in visiting the park. The park supports an
EcoCamp program that brings approximately 180 children into the park for a two-night stay
at the Virgin Islands Environmental Resource Station for a hands-on experience in a natural
setting. Nearly every school in the St. Thomas/St. John school district has visited the
Cinnamon Bay Taino Indian archeology site. Here they have learned about some of the
original inhabitants of these islands and experienced archeological methods in uncovering
this history.
Appendix J. Virgin Islands National Park Centennial Strategy | 97
-------
5. Reduce environmental impacts of park operations
a. Reduce the environmental impacts of park operations on air and water quality. A
concrete block pit toilet at the Reef Bay hiking trail rest area needs to be replaced with a new
composting style toilet facility. The existing toilet was constructed in 1970 is inadequate to
meet current demands. Its location is also intrusion on the historic scene of the Reef Bay
Plantation and is visible from the beach area, creating a negative impact on the visitor
experience. The Reef Bay Trail is the most popular hiking trail in the park and attracts high
visitation. Multiple hurricanes, tropical storms and the harsh subtropical conditions at this
isolated location have deteriorated the facility. The park receives constant visitor complaints
about the facility appearance and unsanitary conditions. Replacement of this pit toilet will
allow for the accommodation of increased visitation. After a steep 3-mile hike, this upgraded
facility will be a welcomed sight to the weary hikers. Public comment on the upgrading of
this facility is positive and it would greatly increase the visitor satisfaction to this historic
cultural trail area. The new facility will require fewer visits by maintenance staff to the boat-
only access location and reduce operational costs.
b. As part of the Green Energy Parks Program, we plan to construct an electric charging
station near park headquarters in Cruz Bay and purchase six electric vehicles. These
vehicles would be used in the vicinity of headquarters and in a variety of other operations
along the North Shore Road. The charging station would be located in the Cruz Bay
maintenance area and powered by photovoltaic cells. Virgin Islands National Park is currently
working in a multi-level effort with gateway communities, local and territorial agencies in
preparing regional transportation planning and in beginning to look at alternative
transportation for visitors in the vicinity of the Cruz Bay headquarters area where gridlock
occurs on a daily basis throughout the year. Unfortunately, the park has not had the funding
resources available to begin to address the use of alternative fuels. Funding would send the
message to the public and the over one million visitors annually to Saint John Island that the
National Park Service is serious about greening its operations, as well as encouraging
partners to do the same.
6. Inspire an environmental conscience in Americans.
a. Demonstrate environmental excellence through increased use of alternative energy and
fuels at every park. To achieve this goal, Virgin Islands National Park will continue to use and
maintain their solar water heaters on park residences. The park will continue to maintain its
current system of photovoltaic cells and will work to add new ones where appropriate.
7. Encourage collaboration among and assist park and recreation systems at every level —
federal, regional, state, and local — to help build an outdoor recreation network accessible
to all Americans.
a. Rehabilitate over 2,000 miles of trails within or connected to national parks, including
trails accessible to those with disabilities. Virgin Islands National Park has no trails that are
wheelchair accessible, other than very short restroom or short beach access trails. This joint
project with the Friends of the Virgin Islands National Park would provide persons who are
less than fully mobile an opportunity to visit two resources that are representative of Virgin
Islands National Park. The 1/4-mile Francis Bay boardwalk trail would allow visitors to travel
through a mangrove salt marsh to a viewing platform on Francis Bay Beach. The Cinnamon
98 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Bay Ruins Boardwalk would take visitors through a Sugar Plantation era ruins with accessible
wayside exhibits. Completed boardwalk will provide access to Francis Bay Beach and
Cinnamon Bay Ruins. There will be an increase in use on the trail from less than fully mobile
visitors.
b. Develop culturally diverse educational programs and make presentations at various
locations within the park to included past and future acquired artifacts discovered within
the park.
c. Design special signage and Kiosk information template at entrance to various sites.
8. Establish "volun-tourism" excursions to national parks for volunteers to help achieve
natural and cultural resource protection goals.
a. Increase annual volunteer hours by 100 percent, from 5.2 million hours to 10.4 million
hours. Continued with the on-going volunteer program that includes participation of various
community groups and local organizations, and foster new opportunities by reaching other
organizations willing to adapt and maintain park assets as partners and steward of our
resources.
9. Expand partnerships with schools and boys and girls associations to show how National
Park experiences can improve children's lives.
a. Educate local community organizations, schools, churches, VI University, and visitors
about the mission of the park. Provide stimulating and inspiring educational programs that
reflect the culture of the Virgin Islands and its people through demonstrations and songs.
b. Establish and foster better relationships with the local tourism agencies.
c. Expand interest in Virgin Island culture and the park to wider audiences by including the
park programs in tourism publications and magazines.
d. Increase the number of visitors that attend ranger-facilitated programs such as campfire
talks, hikes, and school programs.
e. Request funding for and construct a more attractive amphitheater.
f. Offer more culturally sensitive programs to increase local visitation.
g. Use various promotion media such as radio and newspaper continuously for achieving
our objectives.
10. Cooperate with educators to provide curriculum materials, high-quality programs, and
park-based and online learning. Partner and collaborate with other governmental and non-
governmental entities to provide on and off-site curriculum based programs regarding the
natural and cultural history of the Park. The Park's Environmental Coordinator will work with
teachers and the Friends of Virgin Islands National Park in order to provide assistance with
transportation for those classes that are unable to provide for such.
11. Introduce young people and their families to national parks by using exciting media
and technology.
a. Increase the number of web hits through the introduction of advanced, interactive
features that attract young people to national parks. Virgin Islands National Park will
expand the use of its website by creating interactive tools and other media features that
would enable visitors who are not able to travel to the Park to learn about the resources.
Appendix J. Virgin Islands National Park Centennial Strategy | 99
-------
12. Impart to every American a sense of their citizen ownership of their national parks.
a. Increase visitors' satisfaction, understanding, and appreciation of the parks they visit.
Increase the number of visitor contacts through both informal and formal interpretation.
Virgin Islands National Park will seek to have interpreters and/or volunteers stationed in
high visitation areas such as scenic vistas, beaches, and historic sites to answer visitors'
questions and provide general information regarding the Park, including its significance. The
Park will seek to increase by 50% the number of formal interpretive programs. The
programs will include statements of the Park's significance and follow themes supporting
said significance.
13. Use strategic planning to promote management excellence.
a. Establish a structured professional development curriculum to provide park managers
with the skills to apply best business practices and superior leadership. The park will
increase the use of the Telestation to ensure that park managers and supervisors meet or
exceed their annual training requirements.
14. Promote a safety and health culture for all employees and visitors.
a. Reduce the number of employee lost-time incidents and serious visitor injuries by 20
percent. The park is proactive in developing a strong Incident Command structure for
hurricane preparedness. Activities including maintaining a well stocked emergency cache,
preseason check of generators, and conducting partial shutdown drills prepare the park
staff for safe and efficient operations during storm emergency situations.
b. Continue 365 day a year lifeguard protection at Trunk Bay. Trunk Bay is the most
visited site in Virgin Islands National Park. Daily lifeguard coverage improves swimmer
safety by warning visitors about hazards, keeping powerboats out of the swim area,
assisting/rescuing swimmers in trouble, and providing immediate emergency medical care
for injuries. Redesign and rebuild lifeguard stands for increased effectiveness.
15. Make National Parks the first choice in philanthropic giving among those concerned about
environmental, cultural, and recreational values. This Park is one of the most important
and exhilarating examples of the value of philanthropy within the NPS. This park was
established as a direct result of the vision and generosity of Laurence Rockefeller who
donated the property that became Virgin Islands National Park. At the December 1, 1956,
dedication ceremony, he stated, "To those everywhere who love natural beauty it is an
important step forward in the continuing cause of permanently preserving for all men those
matchless places that, once spoiled, may be lost forever." It is the continuing support of the
Rockefeller family, Friends of Virgin Islands National Park, Jackson Hole Preserve, Eastern
National, Volunteers in Park, and many other groups and individuals who believe in the
natural and cultural conservation of the park that allow us to achieve our mission. The park
will continue to seek partnerships and the support of those who believe preserving our
resources so that the national treasure that is Virgin Islands National Park will continue be
enjoyed today and by future generations.
100 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix K. Virgin Islands Coral Reef (VICR)
National Monument Centennial Initiative
Vision Statement
Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument was established in January 2001, when a
presidential proclamation designated 12,708 acres of federally owned submerged lands to
preserve and protect all the elements of a Caribbean tropical marine ecosystem, and further
the protection of the habitats essential for sustaining and enhancing the coastal and submerged
ecosystems in Virgin Islands National Park; to facilitate research by qualified scientists and
members of the academic community to support Monument management and promote
scientific knowledge; and to promote understanding and stewardship by providing educational
and partnering opportunities for local, national, and international communities. The Monument
includes submerged lands within the 3 mile belt off of the island of St. John and its waters
support a diverse and complex system of coral reefs, and other ecosystems such as shoreline
mangrove forests and seagrass beds that contribute to their health and survival. The biological
communities of the monument live in a fragile, interdependent relationship and include
habitats that are essential for sustaining and enhancing the tropical marine ecosystem and
several threatened and endangered species. Humpback whales, pilot whales, four species of
dolphins, brown pelicans, and the hawksbill, leatherback, and green sea turtles all use portions
of the monument. Countless species of reef fish, invertebrates, and plants utilize these
submerged lands during their lives, and over 25 species of sea birds feed in the waters.
To fulfill the mission of VICR, the Centennial Vision for the Monument is to increase activities
that are critical to the protection and conservation of its natural resources. These activities
include research and mapping, enforcement of regulations designed to protect the marine
ecosystem yet allow the public to enjoy the resources, and increasing public education and
stewardship in the preservation of our planet's precious ocean resources.
Objectives
1. Provide inspiring, safe, and accessible places for people to enjoy- the standard to which
all other park systems aspire. VICR was established in 2001 to manage and protect 13,000
acres of submerged lands, which more than doubled the acreage that VMS manages. VICR
provides access to numerous tropical marine ecosystems and significant historic and cultural
resources (e.g., ship wrecks which are rare in the Caribbean).
In order to provide an inspiring, safe and accessible visitor experience while accomplishing
resource protection, funding for basic operational programs are needed to fulfill mission
responsibilities such as resource inventories, delineating boundaries, managing and
protecting significant species including marine mammals and T&E species, and increased law
enforcement activities [the illegal entry of undocumented aliens has increased dramatically,
and the detection, apprehension, and transport of these individuals has been handled almost
exclusively by VMS Rangers].
Appendix K. Virgin Islands Coral Reef (VICR) National Monument Centennial Initiative | 101
-------
2. Improve the condition of park resources and assets.
a. Restore native habitats by controlling invasive species and reintroducing key plant and
animal species. The loss of more than 50% of coastal mangroves in the Virgin Islands over
the past 100 years has greatly impacted recruitment offish to our coral reefs. The health of
coral reefs and other hard bottom ecosystems depends on a balanced community of fish and
invertebrates, and it is well documented that mangrove prop root habitats are important
nursery areas for many fish and a number of invertebrates found on coral reefs. Hurricane
Hole and Mary's Creek are the most significant remaining nursery habitats on St. John. As
such, it is critical to assess their value and health. A proposed study will compare the present
coral reef fish nursery value of Hurricane Hole and Mary's Creek to historical values to
determine stability and trends in this community. Results will enable the Park to develop
management measures to further protect and enhance these largest remaining relatively
pristine examples of valuable marine community in VMS and the northern Virgin Islands.
b. Improve the natural resources in parks, as measured by the vital sign developed under
the Natural Resource Challenge. Vital Signs for VICR have been identified through the South
Florida/Caribbean Inventory and Monitoring Program. Park staff and other collaborators
(NOAA, universities, and scientists) are monitoring water quality, coral reef health, reef fish
populations, mangrove fish nursery habitat, etc. Approximately 19 moorings in monument
waters are protecting coral reef and seagrass communities in several areas. Storm refuge
moorings for approximately 80 vessels are protecting shoreline mangrove communities from
the damage associated with attaching vessels to them. Continued funding of the I&M
Program and funding of several PMIS projects are necessary to ensure continued
improvement of natural resources in VICR.
c. Provide safe vessel anchoring during storms. With the creation of the VICR, areas
previously used for traditional safe refuge for boats during hurricane events are no longer
accessible due to a no-anchoring restriction. This has caused extreme concern among the
marine community as their boats represent their homes and in many cases, their livelihoods.
Hurricane Hole represents the most pristine and valuable nursery habitat for juvenile reef
fish remaining in the US Virgin Islands, and provides the source of reef fish for most of the
reef systems along the east and south coasts of St. John. Seagrasses and many corals also
grow in the shallow waters around the mangrove prop roots. Traditional methods of
securing boats cause significant damage to the mangrove and nearshore marine resources.
We must ensure that there is space for the secure attachment of approximately 100 vessels
from winds and waves generated by tropical storms and hurricanes. By ensuring safe,
environmentally sensitive access to this site, traditional users will support the establishment
of the Monument and be less likely to engage in illegal or destructive use of it, as well as
increase community support and stewardship of the Monument.
3. Serve as the preeminent resource laboratory by applying excellence in science and
scholarship to understand and respond to environmental changes. VICR strives to solicit
and encourage scientific research in natural resource fields to better understand the
processes and dynamics involved in tropical biology and ecology. Considerable work is being
done at VICR in understanding changes in coral reef ecosystems as it relates to changes in
local, regional and global variables. Coral reef changes due to bleaching and disease, and
102 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
changes in reef fish populations due to habitat changes and fishing pressures are being
monitored to better understand and respond to environmental changes. VICR is also
providing an opportunity to determine the effects of establishing a no-take Marine Protected
Area and the ecological connectivity between VICR, VMS, and Territorial waters.
4. Engage partners, communities, and visitors in shared environmental stewardship. In
partnership with NOAA and USGS, the park will develop maps of submerged habitats and
monitoring the park's resources.
5. Cooperate with educators to provide curriculum materials, high-quality programs, and
park-based and online learning. Partner and collaborate with other governmental and non-
governmental entities to provide curriculum-based programs regarding the natural resources
of the Park.
6. Introduce young people and their families to national parks by using exciting media and
technology.
a. Increase the number of web hits through the introduction of advanced, interactive
features that attract young people to national parks. Expand the use of the VICR website by
creating interactive tools and other media features that would enable visitors who are not
able to travel to the Park to learn about the resources.
Appendix K. Virgin Islands Coral Reef (VICR) National Monument Centennial Initiative | 103
-------
-------
Appendix L. St. Croix East End Marine Park (EEMP)
Management Plan
Note: the Management Plan did not include a summary list of objectives. For the purposes of
developing an objectives hierarchy, we have drawn the objectives from the Management Plan,
organized them into a hierarchy, and assigned a numbering scheme.
1. Protect and maintain the biological diversity and other natural values of the area in the
long term.
a. Conserve and protect key community types and species.
i. Sea turtles
ii. Parrot fish
iii. Aggregating fish predators
iv. Seagrass communities
v. Mangroves and salt ponds
vi. Coral reefs
b. Protect the natural resource base from being alienated for other land use purposes that
would be detrimental to the area's biological diversity.
i. Create a clearly defined park on the East End of St. Croix that is accepted and used
by both locals and tourists.
ii. Strictly enforce development regulations.
iii. Implement a water quality program (domestic wastewater, stormwater, marinas
and live aboards, hazardous materials).
iv. Develop a comprehensive coastal wetland and watershed protection plan.
c. Promote sound management practices for sustainable production purposes.
i. Create an infrastructure and support system that effectively manages the area.
1. Obtain long-term sustainable funding source(s).
ii. Establish a comprehensive and coordinated regulatory program that complements
existing regulatory authorities (submerged lands, recreation, boating, and fishing).
1. Implement an effective enforcement program.
iii. Promote fishing shift from reefs to pelagic/highly migratory species and fishing
guide activities.
iv. Establish an effective navigational and boundary marking system for boaters and
other resource users within the Park.
1. Implement a mooring buoy program.
v. Implement marine zoning to protect sensitive marine resources from overuse and
to separate conflicting visitor uses.
d. Promote understanding and increase local knowledge of the value of local marine
resources and the ultimate benefits of protecting them.
i. Develop and implement a long-term education and outreach program.
ii. Develop and implement a community involvement program that includes all
stakeholder groups.
iii. Implement a research and monitoring program.
2. Contribute to regional and national development.
a. Provide an example for future parks in the USVI.
Appendix L. St. Croix East End Marine Park (EEMP) Management Plan | 105
-------
-------
Appendix M. Objectives Crosswalk
EPA prepared a crosswalk to show the source(s) of the objectives in the draft USVI Objectives
Hierarchy (Appendix G).
Overall Objective: Manage coastal resources to improve quality of life
in the U.S. Virgin Islands
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
1. Maximize the ecological integrity of environmental
resou rces
mean - Implement effective management activities
(legislation, permits, non-regulatory programs,
enforcement, restoration)
mean - Consolidate the existing regulatory controls
applicable to uses of land and water in the coastal
zone into a single unified process
mean - Increase the ability to effectively enforce
existing rules, regulations and laws
mean - Support the establishment of a policy that
requires "no net loss" of any additional natural
coastal features that would reduce and retain runoff
mean - Maintain and protect biodiversity
mean - Support more research on and better
understanding of priority issues (e.g., coral diseases,
relationships between bleaching and disease, coral
resistance to bleaching and disease, cumulative
impact of multiple stressors, resilience, possible
effects of climate change, physiological tolerances
and predicted shifts in species distributions, currents,
distribution patterns and sources of stressors,
thresholds, impacts of stressors)
mean - Identify areas of high resilience and sources
of juveniles/recruits of coral species for additional
protection
mean - Create and implement a coordinated
response and restoration strategy for physical
disturbances (e.g., storms, vessel impacts, etc.) to
increase recovery of affected coral reef ecosystems.
Identify means of communication with managers in
neighboring islands to alert of disturbance events,
leverage resources, etc.
a. Maximize ecosystem connectivity and linkages
mean - Research ecological connectivity through
dispersal of eggs and larvae to identify key sources
and sinks
VICZM Act
Goal
A, E
J
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
IV
MIC
MIC
II
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
5
1.3, 1.4
1.4
3, 3.1-3.9
1.9
5.1
5.2
5.3
4.11
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
1
VICR
1
Appendix M. Objectives Crosswalk | 107
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Assess connectivity between existing and
potential MPAs and between spawning aggregations
and juvenile habitat to identify resilient areas for
protection
b. Maximize the ecological integrity of coastal
aquatic habitats
mean - Determine effects of contaminants and poor
water quality on reef resources (spatially and
temporally)
mean - Develop coral reef specific water quality
standards and identify threshold values that can be
incorporated into the permit process and marine
management in general
mean - Maintain or increase coastal water quality
through BMPS to control erosion, sedimentation,
runoff, siltation, sewage discharge, etc.
i. Maximize the integrity of seagrass habitats
ii. Maximize the integrity of mangrove habitats
iii. Maximize the integrity of salt pond habitats
c. Maximize the ecological integrity of
saltwater/marine aquatic habitats
i. Maximize the integrity of open ocean habitats
ii. Maximize the integrity of coral reef
ecosystems
mean - Consider closing areas when bleaching and
disease or hurricane damages are extensive to allow
for the recovery of reef areas
mean - Reduce boat and anchor damage to coral
reefs by installing and maintaining mooring buoys,
navigational aids and markers
mean - Provide education and outreach to promote
use of and compliance with vessel pump out systems,
mooring buoys, navigational aids and markers and to
reduce the production of marine and coastal debris
mean - Prepare for vessel groundings and oil spills.
Develop standard operating procedures for
responding to disasters that include specific roles for
law enforcement and resource management
employees that are consistent with existing guidance
an procedures for oil spills and other hazards and
grounding response programs
mean - Develop a USVI ballast water policy to reduce
negative impacts to coral reef systems
VICZM Act
Goal
H
1
H
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
1C, MA
IVC
IVB
IV.A
I.C
III
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
4.11
1.5
1.6
1.5
5.6
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
VICR
108 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Support effective implementation of existing
and developing Clean Marina and Blue Flag
programs for the USVI to encourage clean and
environmentally compatible marinas, boating
activities and coastal resource use
1. Maximize the integrity of coral species
2. Maximize the integrity of coral reef-
associated organisms
d. Maximize water quality
mean - Define and identify priority watersheds and
develop management plans, stormwater plans and
restoration projects that reduce the effects of
contaminants and poor water quality on reef
resources
mean - Develop and incorporate into
management/regulatory strategies coral reef
ecosystem water quality standards
i. Maintain nutrient cycles in balance (CSOs,
Septics, agriculture, boat waste)
mean - Support an upgrade to the sewage
infrastructure
mean - Work with the territorial government and the
private sector to install and maintain vessel pumpout
systems that are available and easily accessible for
recreational vessels
mean - Reduce erosion and sedimentation
(construction, agriculture, stream channel erosion)
through USVI-specific BMPs (e.g., installation of
culverts, catch basins, vegetative buffers, etc.)
e. Protect against, prepare for and control/manage
invasive species.
mean - Research and compile lessons-learned from
affected locations (impacts, methods, etc.)
mean - Monitor and predict possible distribution and
movement (includes predictive modeling based on
lessons-leaned from other areas)
mean - Monitor effects of invasive species
(i.e., Lionfish)
mean - Prepare, implement and fund a response
strategy, including standard operating procedures for
invasive species (defines how agencies, public etc.
react and respond)
mean - Generate incentives to encourage
public/resource used identification and removal
of invasive species
VICZM Act
Goal
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
IA, IB
IMA
1MB
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
7.7
1.1, 1.11
5.4
1.10
7.1
1.2
8
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
VICR
Appendix M. Objectives Crosswalk | 109
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Encourage/establish regional work groups
to identify patterns of spread and distribution;
communicate lessons-learned; control species
movement.
f. Protect threatened and endangered species and
enhance their habitats and survivability
2. Maximize economic benefits
a. Promote economic development and growth in
the coastal zone
mean - Manage the impacts of human activity
mean - Manage the use and development of
renewable and nonrenewable resources so as to
maintain and enhance the long-term productivity
of the coastal environment
i. Maximize coastal-dependent development
over other development in the coastal zone
ii. Reserve areas suitable for commercial and
industrial uses including hotels and related
facilities, industrial uses including port and
marine facilities and recreation uses
b. Maximize sustainable fisheries
mean - Maintain those coral reef attributes essential
to support sustainable fisheries
mean - Maintain the native fish community
mean - Protect spawning and nursery areas
mean - Reduce fishing effort on key species
associated with coral reefs or particular functional
groups (e.g., herbivores, juveniles, apex predators,
etc.)
mean - Support the effective implementation of
marine protected areas (MPAs)
mean - Assess the effectiveness of MPAs in meeting
their stated management goals
mean - Reduce the use of inappropriate gear and
fishing in MPAs by strengthening local enforcement
and through educational efforts
mean - Improve understanding of the current status
of fisheries resources and patterns of fishing effort
through collaboration with local and federal
researchers pursuing management-driven fisheries
science
i. Maximize the economic benefit from fisheries
VICZM Act
Goal
B, D
B
B
C
C
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
1
IA
IB
1C
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
8.6
4.1
4.12
4.13
4.2
4.5
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
2
3
VICR
110 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Improve commercial fisheries record-keeping
and fisher compliance by developing and
implementing an effective mechanism to improve the
current data-gathering process
mean - Clarify jurisdictional-specific fishery
management responsibilities and collaborate to
ensure effective implementation
mean - Build comprehensive USVI fisheries health
trend data through studies that identify behaviors of
present fishery status and trends within the USVI and
throughout the region, including studies comparing
managed areas to unmanaged areas and managed
stocks to similar unmanaged stocks
mean - Develop and implement effective strategies
created and enforced by fishers to identify,
understand and apply fisheries self-management
practices
mean - Obtain the necessary information to
understand the impacts of recreational fisheries in
the USVI
mean - Develop and implement enhanced tools to
preserve and restore fisheries resources
ii. Maximize the quality of foods from fisheries
c. Minimize risk to property (beaches, coastal &
inland properties)
d. Minimize the economic losses from human
illnesses
3. Enhance the social well being of USVI residents
and visitors
mean - Understand the social impacts of legislation
and regulatory actions on the fishing community and
identify alternatives to mitigate the negative impacts
of these actions
a. Maximize recreational opportunities
mean - Ensure that the public has the right to enjoy
and use the shorelines
mean - Maximize public access to and along
shorelines consistent with constitutionally protected
rights of private property owners
mean - Acquire, develop and restore areas consistent
with sound resource conservation principles
mean - Continue to develop and implement a
recreational license program with associated
legislation for recreational fishing regulations and
clear requirements and authorities for monitoring
and enforcement.
VICZM Act
Goal
A
A, D, E
F, G
F
F
G
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.15
4.9
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
5
VICR
Appendix M. Objectives Crosswalk | 111
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Incorporate a mandated sampling program to
gauge the status of recreational fisheries
b. Maximize the cultural benefits from usage of
natural resources
i. Maximize the environmental justice of
decisions affecting resources
ii. Preserve the historical nature of resources
(e.g., traditional uses, folklore, archeological
resources, religious uses)
c. Maximize the aesthetic value of the
environmental resources
mean - Reduce marine debris and coastal debris by
both implementing strategies to reduce the
production of debris and by implementing debris
cleanup activities
d. Maximize the opportunities for local resident
engagement in management tasks
e. Maximize the equitable benefits from decisions
f. Enhance local understanding of environmental
processes
i. Maximize experiential interactions with the
wildlife
ii. Maximize educational opportunities
iii. Effectively communicate risks of declining
environment to human well being
g. Maximize public participation in decisions
affecting coastal planning conservation and
development
4. Minimize the threats to human health
mean - Maintain or increase coastal water quality
through control of erosion, sedimentation, runoff,
siltation and sewage discharge
a. Minimize injuries from floods
b. Minimize human health risks from chemicals
c. Minimize illnesses from waterborne pathogens
5. Maximize management performance
VICZM Act
Goal
A
D
K
1
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
4.10
7.2
1.12, 2, 2.1
&2.2
2.3
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
4
VICR
112 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment
-------
Objectives and Means
Red/bold font are inferred objectives or means
mean - Provide training opportunities to coral reef
managers to increase their understanding of the
impacts of climate change on coral reef ecosystems;
the predicted range and uncertainty of changes that
will occur; and management strategies, tools and
technologies to assess risk and mitigate adverse
impacts of climate change and related stressors
(includes training a coordinated response team)
a. Improve and enable coordination and
communication
mean - Develop and implement specific mechanisms
to enable improved communication between the
coral reef science and coral reef management
communities in the USVI and to provide current
science-based information and recommendations
for management action
mean - Create and implement a mechanism to
increase communication between regional resource
managers (PR, BVI, etc.)
mean - Develop and implement specific mechanisms
to enable improved cooperation between permitting
authorities at the local, territorial and federal
government levels to minimize development impacts
to the coral reef ecosystems
b. Maximize resource availability
mean - Establish and maintain a contingency fund to
respond to severe bleaching events
mean - Build partnerships among local, state, federal
and nongovernmental entities to identify, leverage
and apply financial and other resources to facilitate
improved coastal and upland watershed
management.
c. Maximize the use of information in decision
processes
mean - Create a mechanism to incorporate
knowledge into management action and policy
(i.e., MPAs, closures, permit conditions, etc.)
mean - Reduce uncertainty on environmental status
and trends
VICZM Act
Goal
EPA
Workshop
Objective #
NOAA CRCP
Goals &
Objectives
5.5
6
6.2
1.10
6.3
5.8
1.7
1.8
5.7
BUIS
Centennial
Strategy
VICR
Appendix M. Objectives Crosswalk | 113
-------
-------
Appendix N. The DPSIR Framework
Drivers are the socio-economic sectors that fulfill human needs for food & raw
materials, water, shelter, health, culture, and security. Sectors providing food & raw
materials include:
• Agriculture - croplands, rangelands
• Aquaculture
• Oil & Gas Extraction
• Fishing - commercial fisheries, artisanal fishing, & recreational fishing
• Forestry
• Mining & Quarrying - coal mining, mineral mining
Sectors fulfilling human needs for water include:
• Drinking water supply
• Irrigation
Sectors fulfilling human needs for shelter include:
• Housing - home construction, real estate, single family & multi-unit housing
• Textiles & Apparel
Sectors fulfilling human needs for health include:
• Medical care - hospitals
• Pharmaceuticals and cosmetics
• Social assistance - child care centers
• Waste management - sewage treatment facilities and landfills
Sectors fulfilling human needs for culture include:
• Tourism & recreation - recreational fishing & hunting, beaches & natural lands
• Education - primary & secondary education, colleges & universities
• Information -telecommunications, scientific research, biotechnology research
& development
• Social organizations - churches, outreach groups, families
Sectors fulfilling human needs for security include:
• National defense - coastal defense, munitions
• Public administration - government, courts, law enforcement
Infrastructural sectors provide the physical, organizational, and technical support for the
economy to function and include:
• Manufacturing & trade
• Transportation - air & road transportation, ship & boat operation, warehousing
• Construction and civil engineering - road & utility line construction, building
construction, dam construction, pipeline construction
• Finance & insurance - banks, insurance
• Technical services - management of companies, repair & maintenance services,
personal services
• Utilities - electric power, natural gas
Driving forces can originate and act globally, regionally or locally.
Appendix N. The DPSIR Framework | 115
-------
Pressures are human activities that create stress on the environment and include:
Landuse changes resulting from alterations of the natural landscape, typically
associated with population growth, including:
• Coastal development
• Land development
• Shoreline alteration
• Hydrologic modifications
Discharges of pollutants may result from the operation of industries or vehicles, or
the diffuse distribution of contaminants from agricultural lands, roads, or lawns
through ground-water or storm-water run-off, and include:
• Applied chemicals - use of fertilizers, pesticides, insecticides, and herbicides
• Atmospheric discharges - vehicle & smokestack emissions including
greenhouse gas emissions, sulphur & nitrogen oxide emissions, volatile organic
compound emissions
• Waterborne discharges - point and non-point source discharges including
wastewater discharges, contaminant discharges, and impervious surface run-off
Contact uses are human activities that lead to a direct alteration or manipulation of
the environment, and include:
• Physical damage - dredging & filling, boat gear & anchor damage, vessel
groundings, trampling, movement of boats, deforestation
• Biological addition - ballast discharge, release of non-natives, feeding, creation
of artificial habitat
• Biological harvest - harvesting, fishing, accidental by-catch, clear cutting
Pressures depend on the kind and level of technology involved in source activities, and
can vary across geographic regions and spatial scales.
The Pressures exerted by society may lead to unintentional or intentional changes in the
State of the environment, including the concentration and quantity of physical and
chemical variables through inputs of contaminants or sediments, or climate change, as
well as altering the abundance, size, and diversity of biological variables by causing
mortality or altering interactions among species.
The State is the condition of the abiotic and biotic components of the ecosystems in a
certain area in terms of:
• Physical variables - the quantity and quality of physical phenomena such as
temperature or light availability
• Chemical variables - the quantity and quality of chemicals such as atmospheric
CCh concentrations or nitrogen levels
• Biological variables - the condition at the ecosystem, habitat, species,
community, or genetic levels, such as fish stocks or biodiversity
Changes in the quality and functioning of the ecosystem have an Impact on the welfare
or well being of humans through the provision of ecosystem services. Ecosystem goods
116 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
and services are ecosystem functions or processes that directly or indirectly benefit
human social or economic drivers, or have the potential to do so in the future.
Ecosystem processes benefit humans through:
• Provisioning of food, timber, water
• Regulation of air quality, water quality, or disease
• Cultural benefits including aesthetic or recreational value
• Indirect supporting processes that maintain the ecosystem
The value of ecosystem services depends on human need and use (e.g., market value).
Humans make decisions in Response to the impacts on ecosystem services or their
perceived value.
Responses are actions taken by groups or individuals in society and government to
prevent, compensate, ameliorate or adapt to changes in the state of the environment.
Responses may seek to control Drivers through policies or economic decisions that
directly influence sectors, including:
Food & energy policies
• Agricultural Best Management Practices-including pest and nutrient
management, or conservation buffers
• Fishing & hunting policies - such as catch limitations, consumer preferences for
sustainable species
• Energy policies - including carbon credits, emissions testing, alternative energy
sources
Health policies
• Waste-treatment policies
• Biomedical research funding
• Patent laws regarding naturally found bio-chemicals
Cultural polices
• Environmental education and outreach - including training, demonstrations, or
brochures
• Tourism policies - including establishing visitor centers or marketing to
increase, decrease, or direct tourism activities
Security policies
• Actions to improve enforcement of existing laws
• Political pressure by citizens on government officials
Appendix N. The DPSIR Framework | 117
-------
Responses may also seek to control Pressures through regulations or technology that
limit human activities, or decisions designed to modify human behavior, including:
Land-use zoning which seeks to plan and control development of lands through:
• Land-use management
• Building permits
• Beach re-nourishment
• Designation of protected areas
Discharge regulations which place limits on and monitor pollution including:
• Non-point source discharge regulations
• Point or mobile source discharge regulations
Technological innovations
• Improved technology
• Alternate energy sources - such as solar or wind power
Coastal zone management
• Fishing regulations
• Boating regulations
• Marine Protected Areas
Use limitation
• Setting designated uses
• Requiring hunting, fishing, or boating licenses
• Designating protected areas
And Responses may also directly impact the State of the environment, through:
Environmental responses which seek to control the physical and chemical
environment including:
• Water quality monitoring
• Air quality monitoring
• Setting water or air quality criteria
Ecosystem responses that control or alter the ecosystem through:
• Monitoring
• Scientific research
• Setting biological criteria
• Restoration activities - including efforts to re-establish native species
118 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Appendix 0. References
101 HR1465, PL 101-380. 1990. Oil Pollution Act.
16 USC § 6401 et seq. 2000. The Coral Reef Conservation Act.
16 USC §1531 et seq. 1973. Endangered Species Act.
16 USC 1431 et seq. 1972. The National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
33 USC 1401-1445,16 USC 1431-1447f, 33 USC 2801-2805. 1972. Marine Protection, Research
and Sanctuaries Act.
33 USC. § 1251 et seq. 1972. Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972.
42 USC § 4321 et seq. 1969. National Environmental Policy Act.
6 USC § 1451 et seq. 1972. Coastal Zone Management Act.
Aronson RB, Edmunds PJ, Precht WF, Swanson DW and Levitan DR. 1994. Large scale, long-term
monitoring of Caribbean coral reefs: Simple, quick, inexpensive techniques. Atoll Research
Bulletin 421:1-19.
Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Snyder BD and Stribling JB. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for
Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish,
Second Edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
Washington, D.C.
Battista TA and Monaco ME. 2004. Geographic information systems applications in coastal
marine fisheries. In: Fisher WL, Rahel F. (Eds.) Geographic Information Systems in Fisheries.
Bethesda, Maryland: American Fisheries Society; p. 189-208. 275 pp.
Bernstein BB, Thompson BE and Smith RW. 1993. A combined science and management
framework for developing regional monitoring objectives. Coastal Management
21:185-195.
Bradley P, Fisher W, Dyson B, Yee S, Carriger J, Gambirazzio G, Bousquin J and Huertas E. 2013.
Application of a Structured Decision Process for Informing Watershed Management Options
in Guanica Bay, Puerto Rico. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Narragansett, Rl. Internal Report.
Bradley P, Fore L, Fisher W and Davis W. 2010. Coral Reef Biological Criteria: Using the Clean
Water Act to Protect a National Treasure. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Narragansett, Rl. EPA/600/R-10/054.
CH2M Hill, Inc. 1979. A Sediment Reduction Program: Report to the Department of Conservation
and Cultural Affairs. Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Courtney LA, Fisher WS, Raimondo S, Oliver LM and Davis WS. 2007. Estimating three-
dimensional colony surface area of field corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and
Ecology 351:234-242.
Ehler C and Douvere F. 2009. Marine Spatial Planning: A Step-By-Step Approach Toward
Ecosystem-Based Management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man
and the Biosphere Programme. IOC Manual and Guides (pdf, 9.14 MB), No. 53, IOCAM
DosierNo. 6, Paris, UNESCO.
Appendix 0. References | 119
-------
Fisher WS, Fore LS, Hutchins A, Quarles RL, Campbell JG, LoBue C and Davis WS. 2008.
Evaluation of stony coral indicators for coral reef management. Marine Pollution Bulletin
56:1737-1745
Fisher WS, Fore LS, Oliver LM, Lobue C, Quarles R, Campbell J, Harris P, Hemmer B, Vickery S,
Parsons M, Hutchins A, Bernier K, Rodriguez D and Bradley P. 2014. Regional Status
Assessment of Stony Corals in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment, accepted.
Fisher WS. 2007. Stony Coral Rapid Bioassessment Protocol. EPA/600/R-06/167. Office of
Research and Development, NHEERL, Gulf Ecology Division, U. S. EPA, Gulf Breeze, FL.
Fore LS, Fisher WS, and Davis WS. 2006a. Bioassessment Tools for Stony Corals: Monitoring
Approaches and Proposed Sampling Plan for the U.S. Virgin Islands. EPA-260-R-06-003.
USEPA Office of Environmental Information, Washington, DC.
Fore LS, Fisher WS and Davis WS. 2006b. Bioassessment Tools for Stony Corals: Field Testing of
Monitoring Protocols in the US Virgin Islands (St. Croix). EPA-260-R-06-004. USEPA Office of
Environmental Information, Washington, DC.
Gregory RS and Keeney RL. 2002. Making smarter environmental management decisions.
Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38:1601-1612.
Hale SS, Miglarese AH, Bradley MP, Belton TJ, Cooper LD, Frame MT, Friel CA, Harwell LM, King
RE, Michener WK, Nicolson DT and Peterjohn BG. 2003. Managing troubled data: Coastal
data partnerships smooth data integration. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
81:133-148.
Hardgrove M. 2007a. First Annual Strategy for Virgin Islands National Park. National Park
Service.
Hardgrove M. 2007b. First Annual Strategy for Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument.
National Park Service.
Hedge P, Molloy F, Sweatman H, Hayes K, Dambacher J, Chandler J, Gooch M, Chinn A, Bax N
and Walshe T. 2013. An Integrated Monitoring Framework for the Great Barrier Reef World
Heritage Area. National Environmental Research Program, Biodiversity Hub. 336 pp.
Hershner C, Havens K, Bilkovic DM and Wardrop D. 2007. Assessment of Chesapeake Bay
program selection and use of indicators. EcoHealth 4:187-193.
Jackson LE, Kurt JC and Fisher WS. 2000. Evaluation Guidelines for Ecological Indicators.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA/620/R-99/005.
Karr JR. 2006. Seven foundations of biological monitoring and assessment. Biologia Ambientale
20(2):7-18.
Kendall MS and Monaco ME. 2003. Biogeography of the National Marine Sanctuaries:
A Partnership Between the NMSP and NCCOS. Silver Spring, MD, 15 pp.
Kendall MS, Monaco ME, Buja KR, Christensen JD, Kruer CR, Finkbeiner M and Warner RA. 2001.
Methods Used to Map the Benthic Habitats of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. URL:
http://biogeo.nos.noaa.gov/projects/mapping/caribbean/startup.htm.
Kramer P, Lang J, Marks K, Garza-Perez R and Ginsburg R. 2005. AGRRA Methodology,
Version 4.0, June 2005. University of Miami, Miami, http://www.agrra.org/.
120 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
-------
Menza C, Ault J, Beets J, Bohnsack J, Caldow C, Christensen J, Friedlander A, Jeffrey C, Kendall
M, Luo J, Monaco M, Smith S and Woody K. 2006. A Guide to Monitoring Reef Fish in the
National Park Service's South Florida/ Caribbean Network. NOAATech Memo NOS NCCOS
39. Silver Spring, MD, pp. 166
Monaco ME, Kendall MS, Higgins J, Alexander C and Tartt M. 2005. Biogeographic assessments
of NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries: The integration of ecology and CIS to aid in marine
management boundary delineation and assessment, In Wright DJ and Scholz DJ (Eds.). Place
Matters: Geospatial Tools for Marine Science, Conservation, and Management in the Pacific
Northwest. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2010. United States Virgin Islands'
Coral Reef Management Priorities. Silver Spring, MD. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation
Program. 40 pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2014. National Coral Reef
Monitoring Plan. Silver Spring, MD. NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program. 40 pp.
National Research Council (NRC). 2001. Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality
Management. Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies.
National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Pittman SJ, Christensen JD, Caldow C, Menza C and Monaco ME. 2007. Predictive mapping of
fish species richness across shallow-water seascapes in the Caribbean. Ecological Modelling
204:9-21.
Pittman SJ, Hitt S, Renchen GF and Jeffrey CFG. 2012. Synthesis of Marine Ecosystem Monitoring
Activities for the United States Virgin Islands: 1990-2009. NOAA Technical Memorandum
NOS NCCOS 148. Silver Spring, MD. 55 pp.
PL 94-265. 1976. Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
Rankin D. 2002. Geology of St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper 1631, 36 pp.
Rehr AP, Small MJ, Bradley P, Fisher WS, Vega A, Black K and Stockton T. 2012. A decision
support framework for science-based, multi-stakeholder deliberation: A coral reef example.
Environmental Management 50(6):1204-18.
Rogers CS, Garrison G, Grober R, Hillis Z and Franke M. 2001. Coral Reef Monitoring Manual for
the Caribbean and Western Atlantic. US National Park Service, St. John, USVI.
http://cars.er.usgs.gov/Monitoring Manual.pdf.
Santavy DL, Fisher WS, Campbell JG and Quarles RL. 2012. Field Manual for Coral Reef
Assessments. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL. EPA/600/R-12/029.
Smeets E and Weterings R. 1999. Environmental Indicators: Typology and Overview. European
Environment Agency, Copenhagen. Report No. 25, 19 pp.
Tutein JA. 2007. First Annual Centennial Strategy for Buck Island Reef National Monument.
National Park Service.
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). 1978. Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management (VICZM) Act,
Section 903(b).
Appendix 0. References | 121
-------
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). 2010. USVI Integrated Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment
Report. Department of Planning & Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection,
St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, 165 pp.
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). 2006. The 2006 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment
Report for the United States Virgin Islands. Department of Planning & Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Protection, U.S. Virgin Islands. 131 pp.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2007. GE04: Global Environment Outlook-
Environment for Development. Nairobi, Kenya.
van Beukering P, Brander L, van Zanten B, Verbrugge E and Lems K. 2013. The Economic Value
of the Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States Virgin Islands (2011). In: Edwards PET
(Ed.). Summary Report: The Economic Value of U.S. Coral Reefs. NOAA Coral Reef
Conservation Program. Silver Spring, MD. pp. 20-21.
Wardrop DH, Hershner C, Havens K, Thornton K and Bilkovic DM. 2007. Developing and
communicating a taxonomy of ecological indicators: A case study from the Mid-Atlantic.
EcoHealth 4:179-186.
122 | Coral Reef Monitoring Needs Assessment Workshop
------- |