CREOCEAN C156 Reef Enhancement Plan Deliverable 6 290920

REEF ENHANCEMENT PLAN
CARIBBEAN COAST
SAINT LUCIA DISASTER VULNERABILITY REDUCTION PROJECT IDA
Credit #5493-LC, SCF Loan # TF017101 and SCF Grant #TF017143
September 2020
Department of Economic Development, Transport and Civil Aviation

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORT AND CIVIL AVIATION
REEF ENHANCEMENT PLAN – CARIBBEAN COAST
CLIENT: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORT AND CIVIL

AVIATION
ADDRESS Secretary Central Tenders Board

Department of Finance
CONTACT 2nd Floor, Finance Administrative Centre

Point Seraphine – Castries – Saint Lucia
CREOCEAN
CREOCEAN Antilles Guyane

ADDRESS 1 lotissement les Mussendas - Plaisance
97122 Baie Mahault
Guadeloupe
Béatrice DE GAULEJAC, Project Director

Phone: (+596) 696 27 82 30
degaulejac@creocean.fr
CONTACT
Ken DESLARZES, Coral Reef scientist, Project Manager
Phone: (+33) 682 741 393
deslarzes@creocean.fr

Type of document Our reference CLIENT’s Reference
IDA Credit No. 5493-LC, SCF Loan
Reef Enhancement Plan
180443 – Deliverable 6 No.TF17101 and SCF Grant No.
Caribbean Coast
TF017143
DOCUMENT 180443_ Reef enhancement plan – Caribbean coast – Final version
Key words: Restoration, Coral, Saint Lucia, Reef Enhancement Plan, Caribbean coast
Signatories
DOCUMENT
DATE PREPARED BY APPROVED BY
VERSION
B. DE GAULEJAC
Final F. LABADIE B. DE GAULEJAC
29/09/2020
Version C. REVERET degaulejac@creocean.fr
K. DESLARZES
2 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Table of contents
1. Introduction........................................................................................................... 5
2. Methodology ......................................................................................................... 9
2.1. Characterizing potential study sites ........................................................................... 9
2.2. Nursery site potential ................................................................................................... 9
2.3. Donor site potential ...................................................................................................... 9
2.4. Restoration site potential............................................................................................10
2.5. Field study ...................................................................................................................10
Area 1: Gros Ilet – From Pigeon Island to Labrelotte .......................................... 13

3. Study Area 1........................................................................................................ 14
3.1. Pigeon Island snorkelling site ....................................................................................15
3.2. South Pigeon Island ....................................................................................................17
3.3. West Pigeon Island......................................................................................................20
3.4. Barrel O’Beef ...............................................................................................................21
3.5. Labrellotte – Manta tow ...............................................................................................22
Area 2: Anse La Raye - From Marigot to Pointe La Ville ..................................... 23

4. Study Area 2........................................................................................................ 24
4.1. Reference station: Anse La Raye Wall .......................................................................25
4.1.1. Surveyed data along the transect ................................................................................................ 25
4.1.2. Health status assessment of coral reefs ..................................................................................... 25
4.1.3. Description and composition of the benthic community .............................................................. 26
4.1.4. Fish .............................................................................................................................................. 29
4.1.5. Pictures – Anse la Raye wall ....................................................................................................... 31
4.2. Exit North Marigot Bay ................................................................................................33
4.3. North Pilori ...................................................................................................................36
4.4. South Pilori ..................................................................................................................39
4.5. Anse Galets..................................................................................................................42
Area 3: Anse Cochon: From Pointe Cochon to Jambette Point ......................... 45

5. Study Area 3........................................................................................................ 45
5.1. Reference station: Petit Trou – Coral health .............................................................46

5.1.2. Fish .............................................................................................................................................. 48

5.1.3. Pictures of Petit Trou ................................................................................................................... 50
5.2. Pointe Cochon .............................................................................................................55
5.3. Jambette Point .............................................................................................................58
Area 4: Soufriere – From Soufriere to Anse l’Ivrogne ......................................... 60

6. Study area 4 ........................................................................................................ 61
6.1. Reference site: Coral Garden .....................................................................................62
6.1.2. Fish .............................................................................................................................................. 65
6.1.3. Pictures of Coral Garden ............................................................................................................. 67
6.2. Coral Garden – Snorkelling area ................................................................................69
6.3. Coral Garden Recreation area ....................................................................................71
6.4. Jalousie Coast .............................................................................................................73
6.5. Jalousie Point ..............................................................................................................76
6.7. Petit Piton ....................................................................................................................79
6.8. Reference site: Matgretout .........................................................................................82
6.8.2. Fish .............................................................................................................................................. 84
6.8.3. Illustrations of Matgretout ............................................................................................................ 86
6.8.4. Comparison of the 4 sites ............................................................................................................ 88
6.9. North Gros Piton Manta tow .......................................................................................91
6.10. Rachette Point – Collection site Acropora cervicornis ...........................................93
6.11. Effective nursery site Rachette Point .......................................................................93
Synthesis................................................................................................................. 94
7. Collection – nursery – Restoration site potential ............................................ 94
8. High potential : spatial references .................................................................... 95
9. Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 95

List of figures
Figure 1 : Result of survey : potential for restoration, nurseries and A. palmata collection sites 8
Figure 2 : Field assessment sheet ..................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 1 .................................................................. 14
Figure 4: Prospection sites map - Field study – area 2 ................................................................... 24
Figure 5 : Anse La Raye - Benthic coverage .................................................................................... 27
Figure 6 : Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 3 ................................................................. 45
Figure 7: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 4 .................................................................. 61
Figure 8 : Way Point Soufriere ........................................................................................................... 80


1. Introduction
The Ministry, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries, Natural Resources and Cooperatives has requested
that CREOCEAN take part in the Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project. The project involves more
specifically the Department of Fisheries and consists of a preparation of guidelines and a coral reef
enhancement plan for Point Sable Environmental Protection Area (PSEPA), and the west coast of Saint
Lucia.
The first document “Literature review and Field reconnaissance report” contains two parts:
• The literature review which is intended to facilitate the field reconnaissance surveys, to select
the coral reef enhancement site, to establish coral enhancement guidelines, and to train local
personnel employed by the Ministry, Department of Fisheries and other agencies.
• The results of the field reconnaissance survey conducted from 20 to 25 August 2018 in the
PSEPA.
The second document is the continuation of the “Literature review and Field Reconnaissance Surveys
in PSEPA”. It is a “guideline for the preparation of reef enhancement plan for Saint Lucia”.
It presents:
• The methodological principles of Coral restoration and coral reef monitoring
The results of the field reconnaissance survey in the PSEPA show that Acropora palmata (Elkhorn
coral) is the dominant coral species found in the southern area of PSEPA. They form three remarkable
coral reefs covering surface areas of 6006 ft2, 614 ft2 and 323 ft2 (558 m², 57 m², 30 m²) respectively,
located in the pass of the Maria islands and near the Mananon mound (190 m²) at depths ranging
between 3 and 10 feet (1 and 3 m).
1500 individual colonies were counted and characterized in three areas of major interest and strong
sensitivity:
• Pass of Maria major – Maria minor Islands
• North of Maria minor
• South Maria major
Assuming a linear growth rate of 10 cm/year, the colonies observed in the area could be approximately
20 years old with successful and plentiful annual recruitment over the past few years. The observation
of young encrusting colonies on the reef substrate indicates recent settlement of larvae resulting from
sexual reproduction.
The health status of the colonies is considered to be very good, there are few occurrences of tissue
mortality and the incidence of parasites is low. The colonies show no or very few signs of fractures.
The abundance and the good health status of the endangered A. palmata in this area is certainly
remarkable and to be preserved as national natural heritage. As such, the area where they occur can
justifiably be considered as an area of high sensitivity.
High turbidity was encountered during the field survey near the Mananon mounds in the bay of “anse
de sable” and along the fringing reef, from the Pointe Sable and towards the northeast, where algal
cover was high at the expense of coral communities.
Water quality in the study area will play a major role in the survival and growth of these endangered
species. Controlling the quality of water discharges into the area PSEPA is therefore of
paramount importance to the continued wellbeing of the species in this part of the island.

The good health condition of the current Coral reef population in PSEPA, the strong density of Acropora
palmata colonies, and the very open exposure of the site suggest that the Coral reef does not need to
be restored in this protected area. Attention should instead be paid to the quality of water discharges in
the zone, in order to guarantee optimal survival conditions and the growth of the existing colonies.
The establishment of permanent coral reef monitoring stations will enable the tracking of the progression
of the quality of the environment, the recruitment frequency and the potential for coral cuttings of A.
palmata to restore other reefs on the island.
In agreement with the Ministry representatives, the second field study therefore concentrated on the
Coral reef restoration potential of sites on the Caribbean coast of St. Lucia; indeed, the Caribbean
coast hosts many Coral reef sectors, utilized for small-scale fishing, and also by the tourism industry,
and is a world-renowned protected area.
On the basis of the principles of the methodology of coral restoration and health monitoring presented
in the document 2, we have studied the west coast of Saint Lucia in order to identify the sites with the
highest potential in terms of coral restoration. The areas with the highest densities of adult coral colonies
that can be used as collection sites are identified and described. Additionally, the sheltered bays that
can house nurseries are also considered.
This document is the Coral Reef Enhancement Plan for the west coast of Saint Lucia.
It presents the identification and characterization of potential nursery and restoration sites.
The Caribbean coast was divided into 4 large study areas, depending on the global geomorphological
factors:
• Area 1 : Gros Ilets : From Pigeon Island to Labrelotte
• Area 2 : Anse La Raye : From Marigot to Pointe La Ville
• Area 3 : Anse Cochon : From Pointe Cochon to Jambette Point
• Area 4 : Soufriere : from Soufriere to Gros Piton Point
The weather conditions did not allow us to work in the south of Gros Piton.
Each area includes multiple sectors.
The additional objectives were:

• To characterize the health status of reference (control) coral sites (dive surveys)
• To identify potential nursery sites (manta tow surveys)
• To identify and characterize coral sites to be restored (density and health status of Acropora
colonies)
• To identify potential collection sites
As a result of this survey, an overview of the potential for restoration, nurseries and Acropora palmata
collection sites per sector has been established.
A large proportion of the decline in coral abundance in the Caribbean region is actually due to the
dramatic loss of Acropora. The coral genus Acropora is a major reef-building taxon found in Saint Lucia
and throughout the Greater Caribbean (Jackson 1992). As recently as the 1980s, these fast-growing
corals formed dense, three-dimensional thickets in intermediate (5–20 m) water depths, contributing
significantly to reef growth, island formation, coastal protection and fisheries habitat (Shinn 1966;

Bruckner 2002). The open structural framework of these densely populated Acropora thickets provides
essential habitat for fishes, lobsters, crabs, echinoids and gastropods (Bruckner 2002).
Saint Lucia supports recently-developed Acropora populations and others more mature that are in good
condition. Biological restoration using cuttings from Acropora nurseries can help promote the
recolonization of naturally-occurring substrates and rebuild Acropora communities in appropriate
locations.
Coral transplantation will allow to :
• Increase live coral cover in areas of high economic value (tourism, fishing)
• Accelerate reef recovery and enhance its topographic complexity while avoiding the
vulnerable juvenile phase
• Preserve threatened and endangered species by increasing their abundance and potential
for reproduction (local production of larvae)
Three sectors demonstrate high restoration potential: Anse Galet, Pointe Cochon and Jalousie Point.
Three potential nursery sectors have been identified: Jambette Point, Coral garden and Rachette Point.
One single potential collection site has been identified on the Caribbean coast, at Petit Piton which hosts
84 georeferenced colonies of Acropora palmata.
Finally, the existence of a patch of A. cervicornis at Rachette Point has allowed cuttings to be planted
in nurseries, which can be transplanted to the recognised restoration sites. As this patch is small in size,
in order to guarantee its durability, it should not be over-exploited.
HIGH RESTORATION POTENTIAL Spatial reference
A2_Anse Galet GPS: 13°56'04,51'' N 61°03'10,72'' W
A3_Pointe Cochon GPS: 13°55'48,14'' N 61°03'33,92'' W
A4_Jalousie Point GPS: 13°49'41,64'' N 61°03'50,65'' W
HIGH POTENTIAL NURSERY SECTORS Spatial reference
A3_Jambette Point GPS: 13°55,1855' N 61°03,7924' W
A4_Coral Garden recreational area GPS: 13°49'08,28'' N 61°04'01,2'' W
A4_Rachette Point _A. cervicornis GPS: 13° 50.376 N 61 03.910 W
HIGH POTENTIAL COLLECTION SITE Spatial reference
A4_Petit Piton GPS: 13°49,997 N 61°04,104 W
Table 1 : Spatial reference of recommended sites

Figure 1 : Result of survey : potential for restoration, nurseries and A. palmata collection sites

2. Methodology
2.1. Characterizing potential study sites

Three complementary study methods are used :
• Manta-tow : an observer is towed by a small vessel for several kilometers without too much
fatigue. The observer assess the type of substrate, coral cover, the overall health status of the
area, and the presence of target species
• Line intercept : conducted underwater and assesses quite accurately the type of benthic
population and its condition. The observer also estimates coral recruitment, urchin density, and
algal cover.
• Census of reef fish done with the line intercept method alows to assess the type and condition
of the fish population as well as the presence of herbivores which are beneficial to the restoration
of reefs and the presence of coral predators that could affect the success of restoration efforts.
Each area is characterized based on these criteria: physical condition, benthic assemblage (sessile
organisms on the seafloor), coral condition, coral population, predators and competitors (algae). The
presence of Acropora colonies in good condition is an indicator of suitable conditions for the
development of this species. Data are recorded for each station. Photographs are taken to illustrate
each area.
2.2. Nursery site potential

There are several factors to consider for the site selection to promote nursery success (Johnson & al.
2011). Following is a list of these factors:
Existing Wild Populations Depth Water Motion
Bottom Type Size of the Area Adjacent Habitat
Competitors Accessibility Human Activities/Impacts
An index of “Potential Nursery Site” assessed as Low, Medium, or High is assigned according to these
parameters.
2.3. Donor site potential

Site selection :
• Existing wild healthy population
• Size of the area
• Proximity to nursery sites
• Number of sites

An index of “Potential Donor Site” assessed as Low, Medium, or High is assigned according to these
parameters.
2.4. Restoration site potential

The essential factors to consider in site selection to restoration success are (Johnson & al. 2011):
• Existing Wild Populations

• Depth
• Water Quality
• Bottom Type
• Size of the Area
• Space Competitors
• Predator Abundance
• Wave Exposure
• Origin of Parent Colonies
• Current/Historical presence of Acropora
• Human Activities/Impacts
• Number of Out-planting Sites
An index of “Potential Restoration Site” assessed as Low, Medium, or High is assigned according to
these parameters.
2.5. Field study

The field study includes, for each of the large sectors, additional observations :
• The location of anthropic pressures: urban activities, tourism, mooring, and natural pressures:
river sewage, turbid plum. These pressures are incompatible with restoration actions
• The location of protected areas, which constitute a major advantage for coral reef restoration.
• The surveying of seaside sections, pre-selected according to their depth, exposure and
urbanisation, with direct observation in manta tow of the population structure, the abundance
of Acropora, of the health condition of the ecosystems, and the turbidity of the
environment.
• The identification of reference sites according to these factors:
o Physical: complexity and substrate nature, sedimentation
o Benthic: % hard coral, macroalgae, free substrate for colonisation, coral space
competitor
o Coral condition: % of colonies showing signs of disease, bleaching, recent and old
mortality
o Coral population: number of dead and alive Acropora, quantifying of Coral reef
recruitment, Coral patch, largest coral (size and species)
o Predators: Snails, fire worms, Damselfish, Butterfly fish, Parrot fish,

o Herbivorous: Surgeon fish, Diadema – Their grazing actions allow the limitation of algal
bloom and are therefore conducive to the growth of Coral reef colonies.
Site Name
Land or marine picture Under water picture
Complexity
Physical Substrate nature Dead Acropora
Sedimentation Alive Acropora
Coral
% Hard Coral Coral recruitment
populati
% Macro Algae Coral Patch
Benthic on
% free substrate Largest Coral
% space competitor Dominant size class
Coral Disease Snail Drupellia
Coral Bleaching Fireworm
condition Mortality recent Predators Damselfish
Mortality old Butterfly Fish
Date Parrot fish
Collector Surgeon Fish
Herbivorous
Diadema
Collection site potential
Low Medium High
Restoration site potential

Low Medium High
Figure 2 : Field assessment sheet
The health condition of existing populations should be correlated with the environmental conditions of
the surroundings. Sectors which are too eroded may not be restored if the causes of the erosion are still
in place.
These factors are summarised in an illustrated diagram per site, in order to define, in a reasoned
manner, the potential of each site for Acropora fragment extraction, and Coral reef restoration.
The pros and cons are detailed.

An underwater illustration diagram is used to illustrate each of the study sites.

For each area, a map is drawn up showing the exploration sectors, the detected pressures, the protected
sectors and the potential sites for the collection of Acropora fragments, the creation of nurseries or
restoration.
The prospected sites are the ones that are studied and characterized.
Only sites with potential are described with details. If a site has no potential, it is only used for
prospecting. None of the sites in the study area 1 has adequate amount of coral biocenosis to be
designated as reference site.

Area 1: Gros Ilet – From

Pigeon Island to
Labrelotte

3. Study Area 1
Figure 3: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 1

The prospected sites are the ones that are studied and characterized.

3.1. Pigeon Island snorkelling site
A1_ Snorkelling Area Pigeon Island
Imag terrestre Image marine
Complexity Sparse rocky boulders

Physical Substrate nature rock-sand Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation yes (high) 0
% Hard Coral 10 Coral recruitment low
Coral
% Macro Algae 80% (turf) Coral Patch dispersed
populati
% free substrate 0 Largest Coral 100 (Siderastrea)
Benthic on
10
(sponges,gor
% space competitor gonians) Dominant size class 10-20m
Coral Disease 10-20 % Snail Drupellia 0
Coral Bleaching 10% Fireworm 0
condition Mortality recent 20% Predators Damselfish moderate
Mortality old 80% Butterfly Fish few
Date 12/11/2018 Parrot fish few
Collector CRE - FLA Surgeon Fish few (young)
Herbivorous
Diadema Absent

Low Medium High
No Acropora

Low Medium High
MacroAlgea abundant - Dead

coral recruit - Few disease on
coral colonies - Nutriment input -
Tourism impact high
frequentation

LANDSCAPE ILLUSTRATION AND SPECIES ASSOCIATED
Pigeon Island (Gros Islet)

Snorkeling area
Surface SMMA’s buoy Seagrass meadow Rocks and boulders
Snorkeling-diving carwrek Rocks and macroalgae
South area Pigeon island

3.2. South Pigeon Island
A1 South Pigeon Island
Image marine
Complexity Sparse rocky boulders

Physical Substrate nature rock-sand Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation low Alive Acropora 0
% Hard Coral 50% Coral Coral recruitment low
% Macro Algae 5 % (turf) population Coral Patch dispersed
Benthic
% free substrate 30% Largest Coral 100 Sid
% space competitor 15 % sponges Dominant size class 10-20m
Coral Disease 40% Predators Snail Drupellia 0
condition Mortality recent 0% Damselfish few
Mortality old 0% Butterfly Fish 0
Date 12/11/2018 Parrot fish 0
Collector CRE - FLA - BDG Surgeon Fish Few
Herbivorous
Diadema Few

Low Medium High
no acropora

Low Medium High
vertical substrate
high hydrodynamic

Pros Cons
Physical structure similar to site with Acropora

palmata colonies Pollution Harbour vicinity - pollution
Vicinity of Acropora faces NE Saint-Lucia Hydrodynamiics
Pigeon Island national Park Few coral diseases
Marine Reserve Dead recruits: Siderastrea siderea
Tourism potential (Sandals Hotel) Limited substrate available
Easy logistic Vertical substrate: limited fixation methodology
Acropora colonies present in area 1 (few hydrodynamics and 1 night /
Transition zone between snorkelling site and epoxy)
diving site

ILLUSTRATION OF MARINE LANDSCAPES AND SPECIES ASSOCIATED
Pigeon Island (Gros Islet)
Surface
Bottom
3.3. West Pigeon Island
Area 1: Gros Ilet

Site: NW Pigeon Island
MT1: manta taw inspection: from Pigeon Point to North Pigeon Island
low medium High
x
3 colonies
diam: 150/150/40 cm
coordinates
N14 05 29.2 W60 58 04.1

low medium High
x
1 death colony
Hydrodynamic: very
high, strong current
Nursery site potential

low medium High
x
substrate: rock
depth: >20m
photo
Hydrodynamic: very high

3.4. Barrel O’Beef
Area 1 - Barrel O'Beef
Complexity Small Piton until 15 feet depth with numerous cracks

Physical Substrate nature Rock Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation Nul Alive Acropora 0
Coral
% Hard Coral 5% Coral recruitment low
populati
% Macro Algae 5% Coral Patch No
Benthic on
% free substrate 30% Largest Coral: 3 feet S. siderea
% space competitor 60 % Millepora Dominant size class 1 foot
Coral Disease 0% Snail Drupellia 0
condition Mortality recent 0% Predators Damselfish Medium
Mortality old 0% Butterfly Fish 0
Collector FLA - BDG Surgeon Fish Low
Herbivorous
Diadema Low
Low Medium High
NO colonies

Low Medium High
No degraded reef - Strong

current - Hydrodynamic
conditions very high - No dead
Acropora -

3.5. Labrellotte – Manta tow

Area 1: Gros Ilet - LABRELLOTTE
Site: Labrellotte
manta taw inspection: from Cuti Cove to Masson Point
low medium High
5 colonies
diam: 100/100/100/80/50
coordinates
N14 04 00.1 W60 58 32.2
N14 03 41.5 W60 58 37.9
N14 03 43.0 W60 58 33.5

low medium High
no degraded reefs

low medium High
substrate: sand
depth: 7m
photo
Hydrodynamic: medium
Nursery site potential: pro and cons

PRO CONS
Sand Fairly strong hydrodynamics (ripple marks)

Potential good water quality Insufficient depth (10m outside the bay)
Mid – open No regulatory zone => possible anchorage =>
buoyage system to set up
Few people
Few activities on watershed
Rocky beach – few tourists
Sediment thickness ok
Scarce fishing on sand area
Technical logistics proximity
Tourism potential

Area 2: Anse La Raye - From Marigot to Pointe

La Ville

4. Study Area 2
Figure 4: Prospection sites map - Field study – area 2

4.1. Reference station: Anse La Raye Wall

A reference site is a site that has a continuous coral population that can be characterized over a length
of 60 m; the description of the coral population is detailed and the structure of the coral community is
described.
4.1.1. Surveyed data along the transect

A first diver inspects once over each transect and perform a PIT survey (Point Intersept Transect).
Therefore, he identifies the nature of the substrate, settled organisms, coral bleaching, under the
decameter with a spacing of 20 cm according to the WFD (Water Framework Directive) protocol.
The corals surveyed are not only the order Scleractinia (narrowly coral) but also Hydrocorals (Millepora
sp., Fire coral) which are bio-constructors reef as well. For each coral colony encountered on the
transect, the first diver informs the bleaching class.
A second diver performs coral juvenile (<2 cm) counting alongside the transect, on a 0.5 m large strip
(using stick). This information allows us to evaluate the regeneration capacity of the coral community.
The second diver performs urchins counting alongside the transect, on a 1 m large strip (using stick).
Within the algae we distinguish algal turf and macroalgae. The turf describes all short algae when we
cannot distinguish certainly one individual from the other. The algae turf cover is primordial within the
reef ecosystem, being a preferential source of food for the herbivore fauna.
The macroalgae coverage is visually evaluate over 10 quadrats of 25 x 25 cm, each 10 m of the transect.
The evaluation of the global health status is estimated from the observations during the dive.
4.1.2. Health status assessment of coral reefs

Recording health indicators allows assessing the overall quality of the environment and the potential
success of the project in terms of survivorship of cuttings and transplants.
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) assessment method is used, to assess the health status of
the reefs using indices of:
• Coral abundance
• Benthic diversity
• Macroalgae
• Associated fish
The implemented methodology for coral reef communities survey is identical to the one developed for
the Caribbean WFD (Water Framework European Directive). This efficient evaluation protocol of coral
community’s health status is adapted from Bouchon et al. 2003 and from the international Reef Check
program.

Global Health status :

Urchin’s density is essential: the diadem sea urchins are herbivores and their grazing actions prevents
the development of macroalgae that can expand and be in competition with coral colonies. Indeed,
macroalgae use the available substrate for the recruitment of new coral colonies and are also in
competition for light.
A healthy environment has a strong coral cover, colonies that are in good condition, unbleached and
not necrotic, few macroalgae, sufficient quantity of sea urchins and recruitment of juvenile colonies of
corals that ensure a renewal of coral population. A balanced fish population also helps to control the
development of algae.
Anse la Raye Wall

The transect is situated at the top of the drop from Anse la Raye Wall with a depth of 50 feet.
Starting point coordinates: N 13°56’05.9 W 61°03’24.5 - 60m Cap 300 W.
At the top of the drop, there are some large boulders.
The large-sized Coral reef colonies all show signs of necrosis1.
Sedimentation is high and the corals often show signs of necrosis and illnesses. Some bleaching2 can
be detected (Agaricia)
Macroalgal cover is low (<10%) but the sedimented algal turf is abundant.
Patches of cyanobacteria are visible outside of the transect.
Sponge reef colonization is varied and shows very large individuals. There are patches of sand.
Coral reef recruitment is very low; no sea urchins are present on the transect.
4.1.3. Description and composition of the benthic community
1necrosis : death of most of the cells in an organ or tissue, due to disease, injury or failure of blood
supply.
2 coral bleaching : whitening of corals when stressed by changes in environmental conditions by
expelling their symbiotic algae zooxanthellae that lives in their tissues.

Figure 5 : Anse La Raye - Benthic coverage

The benthic community covers 80% of the station. It is dominated by algae populations (40% of
the area) then by non-coral invertebrates (27%). The coral coverage is low with 13% of the station.
Within the algae populations, turf is predominant, covering a third (30%) of the area. Fleshy and hard
macroalgae are observed in low proportions (both account for 5% of the observations).
Sponges are numerous on Anse la Raye, covering 23% of the area. The barrel-sponge (Xestospongia
muta) is the main encountered sponge. Gorgonians have also been observed but less so than sponges
(4% of the occurrence).
The hard coral colonies constitute 13% of the area, a medium-low coverage. The coral population is
diversified and composed of Agaricia sp., Diploria sp., Meandrina sp., Orbicella sp., Siderastrea sp. and
Montastrea sp.. The colonies are affected by necrosis, 8 of the 39 observed colonies present medium
to large necrosis (25 to 49% of the colonies are affected and one is 50 to 74% necrosed). Three colonies
are bleached.
The uncolonized areas are constituted by sandy depressions (12%) and rubble (8%). Few rocky points
are also registered (<1%). The sedimentation is high on the station, numerous algae turf areas are
covered by a thin sedimentation film. This phenomenon could be problematic: the suspension-feeding

organisms (including coral colonies) are smothered with excessive sedimentation and coral larvae
settlement could be impaired if the sedimentation film is too thick and persistent.
Macroalgae coverage:
The survey of macroalgae shows that 100% of the quadrat is macroalgae covered. However, this
coverage is low, spreading only from 1 to 10% of the quadrat. The main species encountered are
Dictyota sp. and Lobophora sp.
Coral recruitment:
Five coral recruits were observed on Anse La Raye. The coral recruitment density is 0.2 recruit/m²,
which is very low. The lack of juvenile corals is an alarming situation for a sustainable development of
coral population. Without a good coral recruit, the population will not be able to regenerate, faced with
natural mortality, bleaching episodes or diseases.
Urchins density:
No urchins have been encountered anywhere in the transect. The echinidae are the main predators of
turf algae populations, the large growth of populations such as that observed on Anse La Raye could
be due to the lack of urchins.
Without urchins, the available hard substratum is colonized by algae, preventing any coral recruits’
settlement.
Global health status:
The coral colonies are affected by necrosis and bleaching. The algae populations are dominated by the
benthic cover. The global health status on Anse La Raye is evaluated as fair (3/5). The
sedimentation and the low coral juvenile density are the main points to focus on in the next survey.
4.1.4. Fish
In terms of fish settlement, 22 species were identified on the trail, with a total abundance of 214 fish.
From an ecological diversity perspective, the Shannon-Weaver index gives a value close to 2 (1.99),
which is equivalent to an average diversity, with low equitability (0.4), indicating an imbalance in the
population structuring (in terms of abundance): the centre is dominated by one or some species and not
an even spread of fish.
Species richness3 22
Total Abundance4 214
3 Species richness (Ecology): the number of different species represented in an ecological community,
landscape or region. (It does not consider the abundances of the species or their relative abundance
distribution).
4Total abundance : the number of individuals found per sample, it is the representation of a specie in
an ecosystem.

Diversity Index Shannon Weaver5 1.995

Minimum species diversity 0
Maximum species diversity 4.459
Species evenness6 0.447
The species observed are mainly ubiquitous, common

species, without notable distinctive characteristics. Some
species of fishery interest were nonetheless identified:
groupers, pagrus and jacks, but in very low density (less
than 10 fish per species).
The two most abundant species are the chromis (blue and
white), which represent almost 65% of the total observed
abundance. This is not very surprising as these species
tend to form rather dense banks above reefs.
Parrot fish are found in 4 species, with only 22 fish in total (mainly princess parrot fish).
Concerning the size of the fish, the population
appears to be unstructured, with a large
dominance (70%) of fish of a size lower than 10
cm, 26% of fish between 10 and 30 cm and only
3% of fish larger than 30 cm in size.
We are in the presence of a fish population
consisting mainly of juvenile or small-sized fish,
the majority of which are represented by a low
number of species, including some rare
predators.
5 Diversity index : is a mathematical measure of species diversity in a community. It provides important

information about rarity and commonness of species in a community. The Shannon index is the most
common diversity index in the ecological literature.
6 Species evenness : It is the proportion of species or functional groups present on a site. The more
equal species are in proportion to each other, the greater the evenness of the site. A site with low
evenness indicates that a few species dominate the site. It is a measure of biodiversity between 0 and
1 represented as the Pielou’s evenness index J’.

Considering the trophic regimes, there is a large dominance of omnivores7 (67%) and a small share of
herbivores8 (13%) and piscivores9 (11%). Carnivores10 (1st and 2nd order) are very much in the minority
with 7 and 1% respectively. In terms of biomass, herbivores represent 34.7% of the total observed
biomass (15.5 kg in total) and piscivores 32% (approximately 5 kg). Although the number of piscivore
fish is low, they are mainly adult fish of relatively large size.
As a reminder, population of herbivorous fish can limit the development of macroalgae that compete
with corals (for space and light) and that inhibit the recruitment of corals. Herbivorous fish are vital for
the resilience (ability to recover from stress) of coral reefs. Healthy populations of herbivores, especially
fish, represent one of the most useful indicators of reef resilience.
In our case, the low proportion of herbivores, large individuals and a small number of predators signifies
a rather healthy environment. However, it is slightly unbalanced from an ichthyological point of view,
with a risk regarding the coral resilience (potential algal development in the absence of grazers such as
parrotfish). Fishing pression may be responsible for the small number of large fish.
A study carried out in Guadeloupe (Kopp, thesis, 2007) demonstrated that herbivore fish of small size
are not able to regulate algal growth, even when in large quantities (which is not the case here). In
contrast, the reefs have the advantage of a reserve status, with larger-sized fish which consume almost
all of the algal population.
4.1.5. Pictures – Anse la Raye wall
7 omnivore: an animal that is naturally able to eat both plants and meat
8 herbivore: an animal that eats only plants
9 piscivore: a carnivorous animal that feeds primarily on fish

10 carnivore: an animal that eats meat

ANSE LA RAYE WALL (Anse La Raye)
Coral and sponges community
Coral wall
Coral diseases or bleaching

4.2. Exit North Marigot Bay
Area 2 - Exit North Marigot Bay
Complexity wall until 15 feet depth then blocks (15 feet)

Physical Substrate nature Rock Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation medium Alive Acropora 0
Coral
% Hard Coral 30% Coral recruitment low
populati
% Macro Algae 0% Coral Patch sparse
Benthic on
% free substrate 30% Largest Coral: 3 feet S. siderea
% space competitor 40 % Millepora Dominant size class 1,2 foot
Coral Disease 10% Snail Drupella 0
condition Mortality recent 0% Predators Damselfish low
Mortality old 0% Butterfly Fish low
Collector CRE/BDG Surgeon Fish low
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
No Acropora colony

Low Medium High
No dead Acropora
Medium hydrodynamic
conditions

Exit North Marigot Bay - Restoration site potential : low

GPS: 13°58'09,54'' N 61°01'49,18'' W
Pros Cons
High Depth near the site: good water quality

Logistic facilities
No Acropora
Tourism potential
No protected area, no marine reserve
Physical factors: ok
Sedimentation: medium
Biological factors: ok
Vicinity to Marigot Bay Port
Coral condition: ok
Predators: low
Surface area: 100 x 30 feet

NORTH EXIT MARIGOT BAY
Surface view Top of wall
Top of rocks
4.3. North Pilori

A2_NORTH PILORI
Image terrestre Image marine
Rocky boulders (6-30 feet) with high rugosity - Sandy bottom

Complexity at 15 feet depth
Physical
Substrate nature Rock Dead Acropora 3
Sedimentation High on bottom Alive Acropora 3
Coral
% Hard Coral 15-20 % Coral recruitment Low
populatio
% Macro Algae 0 - Turf few Coral Patch sparse colony
Benthic n
% free substrate 55% Largest Coral 3,5 f. Diploria
% space competitor 25% Dominant size class 1,5 f. P. astr.
Coral Disease 30% Predators Snail Drupella 0
Coral Bleaching <5% Fireworm 0
condition Mortality recent 0 Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old high Butterfly Fish 0
Date 14/11/2018 Parrot fish Moderate
Collector BDG - FLA - CRE Surgeon Fish High
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
Only 3 colonies

Low Medium High
Alive and dead Acropora

palmata
surface: 3000 m²
Sedimentation - turbidity

North Pilori - Restoration site potential: medium

GPS: 13°57,1708' N 61°02,3968' W
Pros Cons
Alive and dead Acropora palmata
Surface available
Logistic facilities
Tourism potential
Sandal buoys
Snorkeling and diving area No protected area, no marine reserve
Physical parameters: ok Sedimentation: on bottom
Biological parameters: ok Fishing activities: 1 fish pot
Diadema abundant - grazing
Coral condition: ok
Predators: low
Surface area: 30 - 50 block
Potential out planting: 150 colonies
North Pilori nursery – Nursery site potential A2 : Low
PRO CONS
Sand bottom Only 10m deep

Hydrodynamism medium Close to river
« open bay » Sea grass
Large area Fishing activities
Enough thickness sedimentary for mooring

RESTORATION SITE « NORTH PILORI »
Surface view View from surface
Ehlkorn coral (Acropora palmata)
Urchins (Diadema antillarum) Gorgonians and brain corals Gorgonians on bottom

4.4. South Pilori

A2_SOUTH PILORI
10 Rocky boulders (diameter 30 feet) with high rugosity -

Complexity Sandy bottom at 15 feet depth - surface available 30 x 50 m
Physical
Sedimentation Low Alive Acropora 5
Coral
% Hard Coral 15% Coral recruitment Low
populatio
Benthic n
% free substrate 65% Largest Coral 4 f. Diploria
% space competitor 20 % - sponge Dominant size class 2 f. Diplo
Coral Bleaching <5% Fireworm 0
condition Mortality recent 0 Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old medium Butterfly Fish Low
Collector BDG - FLA - CRE Surgeon Fish High
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
Only 5 colonies
Low Medium High
Alive and dead A. palmata

surface available 1500 m²

South Pilori - Restoration site potential: medium

GPS: 13°56'42,49'' N 61°02'42,56'' W
Pros Cons

Logistic facilities
No protected area, no marine reserve
Sedimentation: at the bottom
Diadema abundant grazing
Surface available - 1500 m²
Coral condition: ok
Wave exposure near rocks
Predators: low
Surface area: 10 blocks

RESTORATION SITE « South Pilori»
View from surface

4.5. Anse Galets

Area 2 - Anse Galet
wall to 6 feet depth then slope 20-30% with blocks and

Complexity boulders until 12 feet
Physical
Coral
% Hard Coral 10% Coral recruitment no
populati
% Macro Algae 0% Coral Patch sparse
Benthic on
% free substrate 50% Largest Coral: 3 feet Orbicella
% space competitor 40 % Millepora Dominant size class 2 feet
Coral Bleaching 0% Fireworm Medium
condition Mortality recent 0% Damselfish Low
Mortality old 2% Acropora Butterfly Fish Low
Date 13/11/2018 Parrot fish Low
Collector CRE/ BDG Surgeon Fish Low
Herbivorous
Diadema Moderate

Low Medium High
13 colonies (3 feet diam)

Low Medium High
13 healthy big Acropora colonies
available substrate
hydrodynamic condition

Anse Galet - Restoration site potential: high

GPS: 13°56'04,51'' N 61°03'10,72'' W to Coast
13°56'05,13'' N 61°03'07,34'' W to Coast
Pros Cons
Inside SMMA Reserve

High Depth near the site: good water quality
Logistic facilities
Occasionally sedimentation: anse galet river
Tourism potential: dive site-wall
Predators: medium
few herbivore fishes
Biological factors: ok, sea urchins present
Fishing activities suspected
Coral condition: ok
Surface area: 1000 m²
potential out planting fragments: 200
Anse Galet - Nursery site potential: medium

Pros Cons
Sand silty bottom
Close to restoration site
Only 10m deep
Average hydrodynamics Close to wall
“open bay”
Fishing activities observed
“sediment thickness” adequate for
Low surface area
anchoring
Close to marine reserve

ANSE GALETS (Anse La Raye)
Surface view Elhkorn coral (Acropora palmata)
Top of rocks
Rocky boulders
Predators of corals : damselfish and fireworms

Area 3: Anse Cochon: From Pointe Cochon to

Jambette Point
5. Study Area 3
Figure 6 : Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 3

5.1. Reference station: Petit Trou – Coral health

GPS coordinates: Beginning of transect: 13°55.47.7 N 61°03.6312 W
End of transect: 13°55.4432 N 61°03.6254 W
The reference station for the evaluation of Coral Reef health is located alongside the Petit Trou cliff, to
the south of Anse Cochon; with departure from La Pointe, at a depth of 12m and the transect unfolds
cap150 over 60m, below the boulders. The depth is between 9 and 12m.
The station consists of large slabs at the bottom of the cliff, on a sandy base.
Sponge reef diversity is high. The reefs are diverse but show signs of necrosis. Rubble is abundant.
As a result of the presence of necrosis and cyanobacteria, the site is classed as average in condition,
with a grade of 3.
Site name : Petit Trou Date of data collection: 14/11/2018
BENTHIC COVERAGE
NATURE OF THE BENTHIC COVERAGE MACROALGAE COVERAGE WITHIN THE

QUADRATS
Living coral 100%

27% 80%
% of quadrats
Uncolonize Biotic
18% Algae 60%
d substrate coverage
27% 72% 40%
28% Other 20%
invertebrate
s 0%
0% 1-10% 11-50% 51-90% 91-100%
PARTITION OF THE BENTHIC COVERAGE
Cyanophytes
Algae turf 1%
Fleshy macroalgae 10% Rock
5% 4%
Hard macroalgae Rubble (< 15cm)

1% 12%
Gorgonian
1%
Recently killed coral
Other invertebrates (<1year)
<1% 1%
Sand (< 0,5cm)
11%
Sponge
26%
Hard coral
27%

The benthic organisms colonize only 72% of the station. The coral population is quite abundant
with 27% of the area covered by coral colonies. The other invertebrates are also well represented,
with 28% of the observations. The algae spread over 18% of the station.
The hard coral colonies are numerous on Petit Trou, representing 27% of the station area. The diversity
within the coral population is medium-high, the main species are: Orbicella sp., Madracis sp., Meandrina
sp., Orbicella sp., Siderastrea sp. and Porites sp. However, the colonies are not healthy, 29 colonies
out of 70 observed are necrosed. The necrosis is mainly spread over 25 to 49% of the colonies’ surfaces.
No sign of bleaching has been noticed.
Sponges are abundant on Petit Trou, covering 26% of the area. The barrel-sponge (Xestospongia muta)
is the main encountered sponge. Gorgonians and other invertebrates (Tunicates) are also observed
(1% or less of each).
The algae cover is medium to low (18%). Most of them are turf algae (10%), followed by the fleshy
macroalgae (5%, mainly Dictyota sp.). The cyanophytes and hard macroalgae (Halimeda sp.) represent
1% of the station area respectively.
The non-living share is relatively high on Petit Trou (27% of the station). The uncolonized areas are
mainly rubbles (12%) and sandy bottoms (11%). Bare rock represents 4% of the area. 1% of the
occurrences are recently killed corals, which support the bad health status of the coral colonies.

Most of the quadrats (95%) are covered with 1 to 10% of macroalgae. Few quadrats (3%) are present
no macroalgae and 2% of them a coverage of 11 to 50%.
The macroalgae coverage is low on Petit Trou, represented mainly by the Dictyota sp. and Halimeda sp
species.
Coral recruitment:
The juvenile coral density on Petit Trou is 2.7 recruits/m² (81 juveniles counted). This density is the
highest observed out of all the surveyed stations.
However, recruitment remains medium and the numerous necrosis observed along the transect does
not bode well for coral regeneration.
Urchin density:
The population of urchins is very low. An average of 0.1 urchin/m² were observed (4 urchins counted).
The lack of urchins does not seem to cause algae devel. Grazer fish could be the predators regulating
algae populations.
The coral colonies are largely affected by necrosis, cyanobacteria are observed, the global health
status of Petit Trou is evaluated as fair (3/5). The development of diseases and necrosis are the main
points to focus on in the next survey.
5.1.2. Fish
From a fish colonization perspective, the structuring is similar to that of Anse La Raye, with 28 species
identified, and with a total abundance slightly higher than 265 fish. From an ecological diversity
perspective, the Shannon-Weaver index gives a value of 1.93, equivalent to an average diversity, again
with low equitability (0.4). These 2 indexes are to be taken cautiously, as the sampling was not carried
out on all the species, but only some very specific species, that showed signs of deterioration.
Species richness 28
Total Abundance 265
Diversity Index Shannon Weaver 1.946
Species evenness 0.404

The species observed are mainly ubiquitous, common species. Some species of fishery interest (such
as plain jacks and big-eyed jacks) were identified but very sporadically (a maximum of 5 fish).
The most abundant species, on this site also, is the white

chromis (150 fish which is equivalent to almost 57% of the
total observed abundance).
Gorettes (Haemulon spp.) represent 10% of the total

abundance, while the damselfish (Stegastes spp., photo
opposite), for whom a deteriorated health is identified, are
barely present, as are the surgeonfish (6 fish).
Diversity amongst the parrot fish is greater than on the previous site with 6 species, but with similar
abundance (19 fish), which is considered low, indeed extremely low. Some lionfish specimens were
observed (4), of large size, which could be considered as predatory pressure for the larva of other fish.
The omnivore species (including chromis, damselfishes, triggerfish and scrawled filefish) are dominant
(63%), followed by 1st degree carnivores, snappers and pagrus (21%). The other trophic groups
represent proportions lower than 10% (herbivores: 9%, piscivores: 4% and 2nd degree carnivores: 2%).
Considering the biomasses of trophic regimes, herbivores and 1st degree carnivores are the best
represented, with 39 and 38% of the total biomass (20kg) respectively.
It should be reminded that “reserve effects” were noticed on the biomass of herbivore species since
their quantities are 2 to 4 times larger than in unprotected areas, and the reserves generally harbour
larger-sized fish (Kopp, Antilles University, 2007).

On this site, small fish (<10cm) are dominant in terms of abundance (65%), while mature and adult fish
are rare (3%). An imbalance in size classes is once again noticed on this site, which could be explained
by fishing pressure (extraction of the largest fish). The absence of large fish does not imply an excellent
healthy environment; the structure of the fish population is unbalanced in terms of size classes and
trophic level (food chain).
5.1.3. Pictures of Petit Trou

REFERENCE SITE « Petit Trou »
Gloval view of bottom
Diversity of corals
Predators of corals : butterfly fish and damselfish

Petit Trou restoration potential
PETIT TROU
Image terrestre
Bottom of the wall, rocky boulders (diameter 3- 15 feet) with

rugosity - Sandy bottom at 36 feet depth - surface available 5
Physical Complexity m large along the pointe - 100 m²
Coral
% Hard Coral 10% Coral recruitment Few
populatio
% Macro Algae 0 Coral Patch sparse colony
Benthic n
% free substrate 70% Largest Coral 4 Orbicella
% space competitor 20% Millepora Agelas Dominant size class 1
Coral Bleaching 0 Fireworm 2
condition Mortality recent 0 Predators Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old 0 Butterfly Fish Low
Collector BDG - FLA Surgeon Fish High
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
No Acropora sp.
Low Medium High
No Acropora
Disease on coral surface
surface available

RESTORATION SITE « Petit Trou »

Petit Trou – Restoration site potential – medium

GPS: 13°55' 27,1'' N 61°03' 27,2'' W
Pros Cons
Physical factors: ok NO Alive and dead Acropora palmata

Biological factors: ok Coral condition medium, coral disease
Diadema abundant grazing No protected area, no marine reserve (but
Predators: low Vicinity)
Surgeonfish high Cyanophycee on bottom
Scrapers: high Few coral recruits
Logistic facilities
diving area
Vicinity nursery potential
Petit Trou nursery potential - medium

GPS: 13°55,495 N 61°03,611' W
Pros Cons
Sand bottom
Far from river
Large area Low thickness sedimentary for mooring
No Sea grass
Close to diving center

5.2. Pointe Cochon
A3_POINTE COCHON
Mega rocky boulders (diameter 30 feet) without rugosity -

Sandy bottom at 15 feet depth - surface available 5 m large
Complexity along the pointe - 1000 m²
Physical
45 recruit
Sedimentation Low Alive Acropora 7 adults
Coral
% Hard Coral 5% population Coral recruitment medium
Benthic
% free substrate 85% Largest Coral 4 f. Diploria
% space competitor 10% Mill. Agelas Dominant size class 1 f. Diplo
condition Mortality recent 0 Predators Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old 0 Butterfly Fish Low
Date 14/11/2018 Large parrot fish low
Collector BDG - FLA Surgeon Fish Moderate
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
Young and small colonies
Low Medium High
Young A. palmata abundant
Very old dead colonies
Important surface available

Pointe Cochon – restoration site potential: High

GPS: 13°55'48,14'' N 61°03'33,92'' W
Pros Cons
Young A. palmata: recent recruits
Physical parameters: ok
No turbidity
Biological parameters: ok
Diadema abundant grazing
Herbivorous: ok
Fish activities: anse Cochon
Coral condition: ok
Predators: low
young parrot: good for grazing
Logistic facilities
Marine reserve SMMA

RESTORATION SITE « Pointe Cochon »
View from surface
Free substrate on rocky boulders
Helhkorn coral (Acropora palmata) Soft coral (Palythoa caribaeorum) Pillar coral (Dendrogyra
cylindrus)
5.3. Jambette Point
Area 3 - Jambette Point - Manta Tow
Complexity blocks (12 feet) Coral

Physical Substrate nature Rock populati Alive A. palmata 22
Date 14/11/2018 on Dead A. palmata 1
Low Medium High
22 sparse Acropora palmata
colony
Low Medium High
Only 1 dead Acropora
arera 30 x 20 m

GPS: 13°54,9350' N 61°03,9350' W
Pros Cons
1 dead acropora
4 acropora alive
2 m deep area 30x20 m
sea urchin have cleaned the substrate no tourism activities
no sedimentation

Nursery site potential : HIGH

GPS: 13°55,1855' N 61°03,7924' W
Pros Cons
Sand bottom Only 10m deep

Average hydrodynamics Close to river
“open bay” Sea grass
Large area
Enough sedimentary thickness for mooring

Area 4: Soufriere – From Soufriere to Anse

l’Ivrogne

6. Study area 4
Figure 7: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 4

6.1. Reference site: Coral Garden

The site is located to the North of Gros Piton, and marked by a diving buoy.
Departing from the buoy anchored over 9m going down over 14m in South-West direction - 250
The transect begins in the continuous Coral reef zone after the strip of sand interspersed with patches
of Coral.
GPS coordinates at the beginning of the transect: 13°49.1012 N 61°04.0912 W – 60 metres – cap 250°
Coral Garden reference site : 42 feet depth
The station has a 40° slope; the Coral reef population is continuous; Coral reef diversity is high, and the
colonies are in an overall good health condition.
Recruitment is non-existent and there is an absence of urchins.
The macroalgae coverage of the station is high, and cyanobacteria are present.
This abundance of macroalgae and the low recruitment give this site an average health condition
classification, with a grade between 2.5 and 3.
In continuation of the transect, a large massif of Orbicella annularis in very good health condition is
notable; its surface area is exceptional: it spreads from - 9 to - 14 metres over a length estimated at 20
metres.
A massif of Porites in perfect condition can be observed, with a surface area of 5x10 m².


Soufriere – Coral Garden
The benthic organisms cover 83% of the site. The community is dominated by algae which
represent 41% of the area. Living coral and other invertebrates are respectively spread over 20%
and 22% of the area.
The algae dominate the seafloor, primarily represented by fleshy macroalgae (34%). The most abundant
species are Dictyota sp. and Peysonnelia sp., but Caulerpa sp. and Lobophora sp. have also been
detected. Cyanobacteria are relatively numerous (5%) forming commonly reddish filamentous cover.
These biofilms represent an eutrophic ecosystem (accumulation of nutrients). Algae turf, coralline algae
and hard macroalgae are sporadic on Coral Garden station (1% or less).
The hard coral colonies constitute 20% of the area, a medium-high coverage. The population is well
diversified with the main species: Agaricia sp., Portites sp., Meandrina sp., Orbicella sp., Siderastrea
sp. and Montastrea sp. The colonies are generally healthy, a notable Orbicella sp. colony of 2 meters
has been observed. Five colonies, however, show signs of necrosis, mostly over 25 to 49% of their area.
Sponges are abundant on Coral garden survey, representing 22% of the station area. One other
invertebrate (worm, anemona, echinida…) has also been registered.
The non-living parts are mainly sandy areas (14%). Little rubble (3%) has also been detected on this
station.

The macroalgae are abundant on Coral Garden and are present on 100% of the quadrats. 8% of the
quadrats are totally covered with it. 18% present a 51 to 90% coverage. The rest of the quadrats (73%)
cover less than 50% of macroalgae coverage (1 to 50%).
The macroalgae coverage is high on this station. However, an excessive coverage could be problematic
for coral recruitment. Indeed, the coral larvae need uncolonized hard substratum to settle.
Coral recruitment:
The Coral Garden station does not show the presence of any juvenile corals. The lack of juvenile corals
is an alarming situation for the sustainable development of the coral population. Without a good coral
recruit, the population will not be able to regenerate, in face of natural mortality, bleaching episodes or
diseases.
Urchin density:
No urchins were observed during the survey. The large growth of macroalgae detected in Coral Garden
could be due to the lack of urchins. Indeed, these Echinidae are the main predators of such algae
populations. Without urchins, the available hard substratum is colonized by algae, impeding any coral
recruits’ settlement.
The abundant fleshy macroalgae cover and the signs of bleaching devaluate the global health status of
the station to fair status (3/5). The macroalgae coverage and the lack of juvenile corals are the main
points to focus on in the next survey.
6.1.2. Fish
The fish population is less diversified in comparison with the two previous sites: only 17 species were
identified, but with a total abundance higher than 429 fish. The Shannon-Weaver diversity index is 1.19,
equivalent to a poor diversity, with low equitability (0.29), indicating a deep imbalance in the structuring
of the population. These 2 indexes are to be taken cautiously, as the sampling was not carried out on
all the species, but only some very specific species, that showed signs of disruption.
Species richness 17
Total Abundance 430

The species observed are identical to those on the other sites, with a significant dominance of ubiquitous
and common species. Of notable interest are the stealthy passage through the water column of two
plain kingfishes (see photo below) and the presence of a medium to low common species: the garden
eel, which colonizes sandy beds (see photo below).
The most abundant species remains the white chromis (300 species, equivalent to almost 69% of the
total abundance. 60 juvenile blue chromis (Chromis cyanea) were also detected.
Eisemann et al., 2019 (Frontiers in Marine Science) showed that damselfish have a strong impact on
the resilience of coral reefs. An over-abundance of this group of fish (due to a low abundance of their
predators such as groupers or snappers) can reveal an imbalance of the environment, with an algo over-
development to the detriment of corals. Thus, the presence of numerous damselfish on this site
potentially reflects a stressed and disturbed environment.
The presence of 12 adult plain jackfish observed on the reef should nonetheless be noted.
There is a very low species representation where the main taxonomic groups are concerned: 4 parrot
fish species (mainly Scarus taeniopterus), 1 surgeonfish species (Acanthurus bahianus), 1 grunt species
(Haemulon aurolineatum), 1 pagrus species (Lutjanus synagris) and 1 grouper species (Cephalopholis
cruentatus).
Due to the over-representation of chromis, the omnivore trophic group is predominant (84% of the
abundance) and <10cm fish account for 86% of the total abundance.
Herbivores (parrot fish and surgeonfish) are present in a very low quantity (6%), while carnivores and
piscivores account for 6% and 4% respectively. The very low proportion of herbivores may explain
(partially) the macroalgae recovery rate, at the expense of Coral reefs.

Considering the biomasses of trophic regimes, herbivores and piscivores are the best represented, with
32 and 24% of the total biomass (20kg) respectively.
6.1.3. Pictures of Coral Garden

REFERENCE SITE « Coral Garden »
Diversity of corals
Community of sponges and corals

6.2. Coral Garden – Snorkelling area

Area 4 - Coral Garden snorkelling area
Complexity from 0 to 9 feet depth: blocks (average size: 15 feet)

Physical Substrate nature Rock on sand Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation low Alive Acropora 2
Coral
% Hard Coral 5% Coral recruitment 0
populati
% Macro Algae 1% Coral Patch sparse colony
Benthic on
% free substrate 90% Largest Coral (60-80cm)
Diploria
:
% space competitor 5% Dominant size class (P.20asteroides)
condition Mortality recent 0% Damselfish few
Date 16/11/2018 Large Parrot fish moderate
Collector CRE/FLA Surgeon Fish High
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
2 Acropora colony
Low Medium High
substrate mobility (boulders can

break the coral)
Coral garden Snorkeling site : from 0 to 9 feet depth

Reference Site : 42 feet depth

REFERENCE SITE « Coral Garden snorkeling area»
Global view of bottom
Diversity of coral’s colony

Coral garden – Nursery site potential : high

Area 4 - Coral Garden Nursery
GPS: N13 49.184 W61 04.158
Pros Cons
Sand bottom
Only 12m deep
High hydrodynamics
Sea grass
“open bay and deep water”
Large area 50 x 50 m

GPS: N13 49.184 W61 04.158
Pros Cons
Sand bottom medium area 10 x 20 m

High hydrodynamics Only 50 cm of layer of sand for mooring
“open bay and deep water” slope 30°
Depth 22 m
12 meters depth 22 meters depth
The coral garden snorkeling area is located along the coast in a rocky sector (9 feet depth), while the
nursery site potential is 12 m (36 feet) and 22 m (66 feet) depth, with seagrass, a little further offshore.
The potential for restoration and collection are studied on the coast where natural coral populations are
located, while nursey sites are sought further offshore on sandy bottoms in order to be able to practice
suspended breeding of cuttings.

6.3. Coral Garden Recreation area

p
Area 4 - Coral Garden recreational area
from 0 to 15 feet depth : blocks (average size: 15 feet), 15 to

21 feet: coral reef, 21 to 27 feet: sand, 27 to 30 seagrass and
Physical Complexity mooring
Substrate nature Rock and sand Dead Acropora 0
Sedimentation medium, hight Alive Acropora 0
Coral
% Hard Coral 30% Coral recruitment 0
populati
% Macro Algae 5% Coral Patch no
Benthic on
% free substrate 55% Largest Coral (200 cm) P.
: Porites
% space competitor 10% Dominant size class (P.30asteroides)
condition Mortality recent 0% Predators Damselfish few
Date 16/11/2018 Large Parrot fish moderate
Collector CRE/FLA Surgeon Fish moderate
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High

Low Medium High
substrate mobility (boulders can

break the coral)

REFERENCE SITE « Coral Garden recreational area»
Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata)
Rocky boulders
Coral Garden Recreation area – 2 Nursery sites High potential
Potential Nursery site 1

GPS: 13°49'08,28'' N 61°04'01,2''
Pros Cons
Sand bottom
Medium hydrodynamics Only 7m deep
“open bay and deep water “ Sea grass
Medium area 10 x 10 m
Close to diving and snorkelling sites
Potential Nursery site 2

60 feet from site 1
Pros Cons
Sand bottom
Medium hydrodynamics Only 9m deep
“open bay and deep water” Sea grass
Medium area 20 x 20 m
Close to diving and snorkelling sites

6.4. Jalousie Coast
A4_JALOUSIE COAST
Rocky boulders (diameter 3-15 feet) on Sandy bottom at 3- 10

Complexity feet depth - surface available along the coast - 25 blocks
Physical
Sedimentation Moderate Alive Acropora 1+4 fragments

% Hard Coral 5% Coral Coral recruitment High
% Macro Algae 5% population Coral Patch sparse colony
Benthic
% free substrate 80% Largest Coral A. palmata
% space competitor 10% Millepora Dominant size class <1 foot
Coral Disease 50% recruits Snail Drupella 0
condition Mortality recent 50% recruits Predators Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old 20 % very old Butterfly Fish 0
Date 15/11/2018 Large parrot fish Few
Collector BDG - CRE Surgeon Fish High
Herbivorous
Diadema Few
Low Medium High
not enough and small colonies

Low Medium High
Young A. palmata present
Vicinity to deep water

Jalousie Coast – restoration site potential Medium

GPS: 13°49'41,64'' N 61°03'50,65'' W
Pros Cons
high coral recruitment
Herbivorous: high Very high snorkelling participation
Predators: low - moderate Moderate sedimentation
young parrot: good for grazing Fleshy Algae - enteromorpha
Logistic facilities Coral condition: recruit - medium
Marine reserve SMMA Diadema moderate
Top of the block already clean (herbivorous)
Experiment to evaluate the impact of
tourism and snorkelling participation

RESTORATION SITE « Jalousie Cost »
Surface view with A. palmata A. palmata Fragments of opportunity
Dead A. palmata Sea urchin Top of the blocks
Anthropic activities
Snorkeling Fishing SNUBA
6.5. Jalousie Point
JALOUSIE POINT
rocky boulders (diameter 3-20 feet) on Sandy bottom at 15 feet

Physical Complexity depth - surface available along the coast - 25 blocks
Sedimentation Low Alive Acropora 3 (2 - 4-7 feet)
% Hard Coral 10% Coral Coral recruitment High
% Macro Algae 0 population Coral Patch sparse colony
Benthic
% free substrate 80% Largest Coral A. palmata
% space competitor 10% Millepora Dominant size class 0,5 foot
Coral Disease 40% recruits Snail Drupella 0
condition Mortality recent 50% recruits Predators Damselfish Moderate
Mortality old 20 % very old Butterfly Fish 0
Date 15/11/2018 Large parrot fish Few
Collector BDG - CRE Surgeon Fish Moderate
Herbivorous
Diadema High
Low Medium High
Not enough and small colonies

Low Medium High
Young A. palmata present
Vicinity to deep water

Jalousie Point – Restoration site potential : high

GPS: 13°49'41,64'' N 61°03'50,65'' W
Pros Cons
Young A. palmata: recent recruits
high coral recruitment
Diadema abundant: grazing
Herbivorous: ok Fish activities but deeper
Predators: low Coral condition: recruit - medium
young parrot: good for grazing Cyanobacteria
Logistic facilities
Marine reserve SMMA
Top of the block already clean (herbivorous)

RESTORATION SITE « Jalousie Point »
Top of the blocks Sea urchin Top of the blocks

6.7. Petit Piton

Manta Tow prospection: 151 colonies of Acropora palmata
Pt Coordinates Number Size Pt Coordinates Nb
Wpt18 AP1_3 N14 05.487 W60 58.068 Wpt35 N13 49.719 W61 03.909 2
AP_14_18 N13 56.708 W61 02.710 Wpt36 N13 49.778 W61 04.030 1
AP_19_31 N13 56.087 W61 03.098 Wpt37 N13 49.787 W61 04.052 17
AP_31_44 N13 56.080 W61 03.078 Wpt38 N13 49.874 W61 04.087 7
AP_4 N14 04.002 W60 58.537 Wpt39 N13 49.918 W61 04.101 5
AP_45_46 N13 54.727 W61 04.088 Wpt40 N13 49.969 W61 04.102 9
84 colonies
AP_47 N13 54.746 W61 04.090 Wpt41 N13 49.997 W61 04.104 23
63 colonies AP_48 N13 54.764 W61 04.098 Wpt42 N13 50.084 W61 04.120 1
AP_49_51 N13 54.841 W61 04.024 63 Wpt43 N13 50.104 W61 04.091 11
AP_5 N14 03.691 W60 58.631 Wpt44 N13 50.135 W61 04.075 2
AP_52 N13 54.844 W61 04.044 Wpt45 N13 50.215 W61 04.017 2
AP_53_63 N13 54.700 W61 04.243 Wpt46 N13 50.239 W61 04.002 4
AP_64 N13 54.892 W61 04.023
AP_65_68 N13 54.935 W61 03.935 Manta Tow Prospection : 151 colonies
AP_6to8 N14 03.716 W60 58.558
AP_9 N13 56.098 W61 03.290
AR_10_13 N13 57.171 W61 02.397
The colonies are close by and the counting is carried out by sector; several colonies are located around
a GPS point. 151 colonies are counted in Manta Tow, the GPS coordinates identified enable to locate
147.

The abundance of adult coral colonies in Petit Piton qualifies the site as a high potential for collection;
fragments of adult colonies can be sampled for nursery use.
Figure 8 : Way Point Soufriere

POTENTIAL COLLECTION SITE « PETIT PITON »
Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata)
Diversity of free substrate

6.8. Reference site: Matgretout
This station has rocky screes up until -8m, after where the slope is steep, over 50%, visibility is excellent
and there is no sediment;
Up until -8m, the Coral reef colonies have average diameters of approximately 40cm and are in very
good condition, recruits are abundant.
This Coral reef population is continuous from 8m onwards, and diversity is high, the colonies are in very
good health condition with few necrosis.
Fire worm are abundant, only 2 Meandrina colonies are bleached, outside of the transect.
The Lobophora calcareous algae has significantly expanded and sponge diversity is high. There is an
abundance of fish but species diversity is average, low for parrot fish, and there are few carnivores.
The transect begins opposite the large Rock on the coast, on the right of Chez Benny at -17m, cap 240,
where there is an arched Xestospongia.

Matgretout
The living organisms spread over 83% of the station. The hard corals represent 15% of the
coverage, the algae populations 30% and 37% of the area is covered by the other invertebrates
(sponges, gorgonians…).
Sponges dominates the seascapes: 35% of the site is colonized by this taxon. Main species are
Xetospongia muta, Niphates digitalis, Aplysina caulifornis
The gorgonians and the other invertebrates are sporadic (both 1% of the station).
The hard coral colonies constitute 15% of the area, a medium coverage. Orbicella sp., Porites sp. and
Montastrea sp. are the main genus observed during the survey. Despite one largely necrosed colony,
the corals present a good health status without bleaching or disease.
The algae are quite abundant on the station, represented mainly by the macroalgae (24% of the area).
They are mainly composed with Lobophora sp. and lesser Dictyota sp. Few coralline algae are
encountered (4%) as well as cyanobacteria colonies (1%).
The non-living parts are mostly sandy areas (12%) and lesser rubble (4%). The uncolonized rock and
recently killed coral represent both 1% of the station.

55% of the surveyed quadrats are covered between 1 and 10% by macroalgae. 35% are covered
between 11 and 50%. 10 % are covered between 51 to 90%. It should be noted that macroalgae are
present in all the quadrats.
The macroalgae are well developed on this station. A too large macroalgae coverage could be
problematic for coral recruitment. Indeed, the coral larvae need uncolonized hard substratum to settle.
Coral recruitment:
Only 1 recruit had been observed on Matgretout. The average coral recruitment is considered as null.
The lack of juvenile corals is an alarming situation for the sustainable development of the coral
population. Without a good coral recruit, the population will not be able to regenerate, in front of natural
mortality, bleaching episodes or diseases.
Urchins density:
Two urchins (Diadema antillarum) were counted in the whole transect. The urchin density is of
0.1 individual/m², which is very poor. A lack of urchins could be problematic to regulate algae population.
Without sufficient echinidae density, the available hard substratum is colonized by algae, hindering the
coral recruits’ settlement.
Despite healthy coral colonies on Matgretout, the global health status of the station is evaluated as
healthy (2.3/5). The macroalgae coverage and the lack of juvenile corals are the main points to focus
on in the next survey.
6.8.2. Fish
In terms of fish settlement, 25 species were identified on the trail, with a total abundance of 306 fish.
From an ecological diversity perspective, the Shannon-Weaver index gives a value close to 1.47,
equivalent to a rather average diversity, with low equitability (0.33). These 2 indexes are to be taken
cautiously, as the sampling was not carried out on all the species, but only some very specific species,
that showed signs of deterioration.
Species richness 21
Total Abundance 306

For information, the average number of species identified in 1997 in the reef areas of Guadeloupe,
Martinique and Bequia were 32.32 and 30 respectively (Bouchon-Navarro, Antilles University, 1997). In
the protected areas of Guadeloupe, the number of species is 58 (Ilet Pigeon, Guadeloupe). It is often
on the external reef slopes, with depths greater than 5m, that the largest wealth of species is observed.
The species observed are mainly ubiquitous, common species, without notable distinctive
characteristics. Some species of fishery interest were identified: a type of pagrus (Lutjanus mahogani),
some colas (Ocyurus chrysurus), 2 species of grouper (Cephalopholis cruentatus and Epinephelus
guttatus) and 1 lionfish (Pterois volitans), as well as the plain jack.
The most abundant species, on this site also, is the white chromis, accounting for almost 57% of the
total observed abundance.
The same main ubiquitous species were observed on this site, namely the princess parrot (8 individuals),
the black surgeon (7 individuals), the blue chromis (39 individuals), and the trumpet-fish (9 individuals).
Concerning the size

classes, the population
seems to be completely
unstructured with a large
dominance (79%) of fish
lower than 10cm in size
(due to the many white
chromis), 15% of fish
between 10 and 30cm and
5% of fish greater than
30cm in size. There are
therefore juvenile or small-
sized fish, the majority of
which are accounted for by a small number of species, including some rare predators, of adult size.
Where the trophic regimes are concerned, 6 species of herbivore and 6 species of carnivore are present
(28% for each), as well as 4 species of piscivore (19%).
In terms of biomass, herbivores represent 31% of the total observed biomass (18.8 kg in total) and
piscivores 32% (approximately 6 kg). Although the number of fish is low, they are mainly adult fish of
relatively large size. Indeed, the individuals of more than 30cm in size account for 53% of the total
biomass.

6.8.3. Illustrations of Matgretout

REFERENCE SITE « MATGRETOUT»
Surface view View from bottom
Boulder star coral Pink tubulate sponge Red sponges
Great star coral Digitate coral Brain coral
Striped parrotfish pipefish Parrotfish

6.8.4. Comparison of the 4 sites
From an ecological factor perspective, the 4 sites are quite similar, with an average wealth of species
of 22 species. The “Coral Garden” site (17 species) is the least diversified while the “Petit Trou” has the
highest level of target-species diversity (28 species). From an abundance perspective, the site displays
an average result of 304 identified fish (due mainly to Chromis lineata and C. cyaena). The diversity and
equitability results reflect the previous factors: “Coral Garden” seems less balanced (= abundance of
dominant species) and less diversified than the other sites, which are more similar.
From a trophic perspective, the number of species per trophic group is similar with an overall dominance
of first-degree carnivores and herbivores, and a lack of second degree carnivores and omnivores. In
terms of the number of fish per trophic group, the structuring is identical with a very large dominance of
small-sized (5-10cm) omnivores. Larger-sized individuals are almost inexistent, in all of the monitored
sites. It may be considered that fishing pressure is present in these 4 sites.
The average biomass per site is estimated at 19kg with a minimum of 15kg at the “Anse La Raye” site
and a maximum of 20.7kg at “Coral Garden”. These biomasses are low in general and can be explained
by: low fish densities (Chromis excluded), the predominant presence of small-sized fish and the almost
systematic absence of large-sized fish.
As a reminder, herbivorous fish can be divided into three functional groups, according to their role in
controlling the growth of algae and maintaining the reef substrate available for coral recruitment:
• Scrapers / small excavators;
• Large excavators / bioeroders;
• Grazers / detritivores;
Each functional group as shown above, are crucial and contributes in a complementary way to the
resilience of reefs. Resilient reefs will often have species present capable of performing all of these
functions (functional diversity) and several species capable of performing each function (functional
redundancy).
Therefore, in the context of observations made on all the sites, the low density of parrotfish (algal
grazers) is a clear indicator of a certain imbalance in the environment. In addition, there is the absence
of high densities population of higher level predators (such as groupers, common seabream), associated
with an over-representation of damselfish once again, reflecting in general a more or less disturbed coral
reef (depending on the sites), both from an ichthyological and a benthic point of view (coral cover).


Primary consumers: can either be herbivores or omnivores. First-level consumers, eat producers
such as plants, algae and bacteria. Herbivores (the first-level consumers) occupy the second trophic
level (first trophic level is for producers). They do not eat any other consumers, only plants or other
producers.
Higher-level consumers: secondary or second-level consumers eat primary consumers. Tertiary or

third-level consumers eat lower-level consumers and are sometimes called final consumers. Some
secondary and tertiary consumers eat plants, making them omnivores.

6.9. North Gros Piton Manta tow

The Gros Piton northern side coast is bordered by boulders and large round pebbles on a sand base,
which is not very favourable to the flourishing of A. palmata; this area is exposed and the rocks are bare.
Beyond 15 feet in depth, many gorgonian corals are present around the boulders.
2 rocks around the seashore are home to 3 and 4 colonies in very good health.
Some sectors display bare sand or pebbles that are not favourable to coral growth as they are shifting.
The confluence of 2 bodies of water at Gros Piton Point causes a very strong agitation to the
environment. The sandy base is suspended and visibility becomes inexistent.
Boulders host 2 Acropora palmata colonies and other coral reef species.
Surveying was not possible beyond Gros Piton Point as the environment was too agitated and turbid.
The site shows no potential for restoration because of its physical attributes.

Manta board « North Gros Piton»
Surface view View of helkhorn coral ()
Different types of bottom
Different types of bottom

6.10. Rachette Point – Collection site Acropora cervicornis

A colony of A. cervicornis very localized is known to the guards of the SMMA marine reserve and has
already been used for coral restoration actions. Cuttings are currently being bred on the site called
effective nursey Rachette point. A dive on these sites enabled to make the following observations :
Area 4 - Collection site Rachette point - Acropora cervicornis

GPS: N13 51.479 W61 04.212
Site: close to a wall in a sandy area with coral patch
Amer : cliff with white pebble
at the edge of a drop with a mini canyon
A. cervicornis - 1st patch: depth 10 m size: 3x1 m
2nd patch: depth 12 m size: 2x1 m
100 branches by 1 m x 1 m
in average condition with many branches in contact with the substrate : bleaching, recent death
positioned above a large madracis coral reef
6.11. Effective nursery site Rachette Point
Area 4 - Nursery site Rachette point

GPS: N13 50.376 W61 03.910
Site: close to a wall in a sandy area with coral patch
bottom at 8.5 m
15 nursery trees
12 with A. cervicornis
4 with A. palmata
100 fragments by tree
fragments of 5 to 40 cm
first bar at 5 or 7 m
9 or 10 bar
bar spaced by 20-25 cm
bar 45 cm x 2 diam 2 cm
tube of 2 inch: tricon
A. palmata grow with a spoon form to the top
nurseries cleaned recently
no predators: (snail: drupella, fire worms)

RACHETTE POINT « Nursery and collection site »
Global view of nursery
Coral trees of Acropora
Fragments of Acropora cervicornis
View of collection site of A.cervicornis

Synthesis
7. Collection – nursery – Restoration site potential
Area Restoration site potential Nursery site Potential Collection site potential
MODERATE MODERATE LOW
A1_South Pigeon Island A1_Labrellotte A1_ Snorkeling Area Pigeon Island
A1: From LOW LOW A1_South Pigeon Island
Pigeon A1_ Snorkeling Area Pigeon Island A1_North West Pigeon Island A1_North West Pigeon Island
Island to A1_North West Pigeon Island A1_Labrellotte
Labrelotte A1_Labrellotte A1_Barrel O'beef
A1_Barrel O'beef
Restoration site potential Nursery site Potential Collection site potential

HIGH MODERATE LOW
A2: From A2_Anse Galet A2_Anse Galet A2_Anse Galet
Marigot to MODERATE A2_Exit North Marigot Bay
Pointe A2_North Pilori A2_North Pilori
Laville A2_South Pilori A2_South Pilori
LOW
A2_Exit North Marigot Bay
A3: From HIGH HIGH LOW
Pointe A3_Pointe Cochon A3_Jambette Point A3_Pointe Cochon
Cochon to MODERATE MODERATE A3_Petit Trou
Jambette A3_Petit Trou A3_Petit Trou A3_Jambette Point
Pointe LOW
A3_Jambette Point
HIGH HIGH HIGH
A4_Jalousie Point A4_Coral Garden recreational area A4_Petit Piton
A4: From
MODERATE A4_Rachette Point _A. cervicornis A4_Rachette Point _A. cervicornis
Soufriere to
A4_Jalousie Coast LOW
Gros Piton
LOW A4_Jalousie Coast
Point
A4_Coral Garden recreational area A4_Coral Garden recreational area
A4_Coral Garden Snorkelling area A4_Coral Garden Snorkelling area
A4_Jalousie Point

8. High potential : spatial references

HIGH RESTORATION POTENTIAL Spatial reference
A2_Anse Galet GPS: 13°56'04,51'' N 61°03'10,72'' W
A3_Pointe Cochon GPS: 13°55'48,14'' N 61°03'33,92'' W
A4_Jalousie Point GPS: 13°49'41,64'' N 61°03'50,65'' W
HIGH POTENTIAL NURSERY SECTORS Spatial reference
A3_Jambette Point GPS: 13°55,1855' N 61°03,7924' W
A4_Coral Garden recreational area GPS: 13°49'08,28'' N 61°04'01,2'' W
A4_Rachette Point _A. cervicornis GPS: 13° 50.376 N 61 03.910 W
HIGH POTENTIAL COLLECTION SITE Spatial reference
A4_Petit Piton GPS: 13°49,997 N 61°04,104 W
9. Conclusion
As a result of this survey, 22 sites on the Caribbean coast have been defined, and sites favourable to
Acropora cutting collection operations, nurseries and potential restoration have been identified.
Zone 4, which is the area between Soufrière and Gros Piton Point, shows the most potential, as in the
same sector the 3 types of site converge; the smaller distances between the sites reduce working time
and are favourable to restoration measures; and in addition, the presence of the protected SMMA area
is a major benefit in this zone. The Petit Piton site hosts 84 Acropora palmata colonies of varying sizes
which could be used to provide cuttings and which have been geolocalized.
In the other sectors surveyed, the abundance of A. palmata colonies is insufficient or they are too small
in size to be extracted.
In sector 3, Jambette Point is a site which is favourable to the creation of a nursery, which could provide
cuttings for replanting at Pointe Cochon or Anse à Galet, for restoration.
The North West sector, from Pigeon Island to Labrelotte only offers sites with moderate potential for
nurseries and restoration.
Surveying of the large field of Acropora palmata detected on the North East coast of Saint Lucia could
also allow the definition of large-scale cutting collection potential, to be put into nurseries in the identified
sectors on the Caribbean coast.
Restoration measures can now be implemented in the 3 identified sectors following the established
methodological recommendations. The training of enthusiastic contact persons at St. Lucia will allow
knowledge transfer for the restoration of the ecosystem and follow up on the state of health of Coral reef
populations.


www.creocean.fr
GROUPE KERAN

CREOCEAN C156 Reef Enhancement Plan Deliverable 6 290920

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CREOCEAN C156 Reef Enhancement Plan Deliverable 6 290920

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REEF ENHANCEMENT PLAN

Department of Economic Development, Transport and Civil Aviation

CLIENT: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORT AND CIVIL

ADDRESS Secretary Central Tenders Board

CONTACT 2nd Floor, Finance Administrative Centre

CREOCEAN Antilles Guyane

Béatrice DE GAULEJAC, Project Director

REEF ENHANCEMENT PLAN – CARIBBEAN COAST

2 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Area 1: Gros Ilet – From Pigeon Island to Labrelotte .......................................... 13

Area 2: Anse La Raye - From Marigot to Pointe La Ville ..................................... 23

Area 3: Anse Cochon: From Pointe Cochon to Jambette Point ......................... 45

1 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

5.1.2. Fish .............................................................................................................................................. 48

Area 4: Soufriere – From Soufriere to Anse l’Ivrogne ......................................... 60

2 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Figure 2 : Field assessment sheet ..................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 1 .................................................................. 14

Figure 4: Prospection sites map - Field study – area 2 ................................................................... 24

Figure 5 : Anse La Raye - Benthic coverage .................................................................................... 27

Figure 6 : Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 3 ................................................................. 45

Figure 7: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 4 .................................................................. 61

Figure 8 : Way Point Soufriere ........................................................................................................... 80

3 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

4 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

5 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

The additional objectives were:

6 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Table 1 : Spatial reference of recommended sites

7 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

8 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

2.1. Characterizing potential study sites

2.2. Nursery site potential

Existing Wild Populations Depth Water Motion

Bottom Type Size of the Area Adjacent Habitat

Competitors Accessibility Human Activities/Impacts

2.3. Donor site potential

9 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

2.4. Restoration site potential

• Existing Wild Populations

2.5. Field study

10 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Land or marine picture Under water picture

Restoration site potential

Figure 2 : Field assessment sheet

11 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

An underwater illustration diagram is used to illustrate each of the study sites.

12 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Area 1: Gros Ilet – From

13 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Figure 3: Prospection sites map - Field study – Area 1

14 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

3.1. Pigeon Island snorkelling site

A1_ Snorkelling Area Pigeon Island

Imag terrestre Image marine

Complexity Sparse rocky boulders

Collection site potential

Restoration site potential

MacroAlgea abundant - Dead

15 / 97 September 2020 │ CREOCEAN

Pigeon Island (Gros Islet)

Surface SMMA’s buoy Seagrass meadow Rocks and boulders