HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEMS ANDBIODIVERSITY

CASE STUDIES: VAILELE, GAGAIFOLEVAO, MA’ASINA AND TA’ELEFGAVILLAGES OF UPOLU ISLAND, SAMOA

by

Olof V. Tuaopepe Nise

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofMasters of Environmental Studies

Department of Geography Faculty of Islands and Oceans

The University of the South Pacific

December 2005

©Olof Tuaopepe 2005

Declaration of originality

I Olof V. Tuaopepe Nise declare that this thesis is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published, or substantially overlapping with material submitted for the award of any other degree at any institution, except where due acknowledge is made in the text.

Signed…………………………………….. Date……………………………………..

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was made possible through the assistance and contribution of many people and agencies, and for these people I thank the Lord and may he continue to bless them all. I give my special thanks to all the following groups and individuals who provided materials and helped me to complete this work.

First, I give my sincere thanks to the villagers and respondents of Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina, Vailele and Gagaifolevao for their knowledge shared in which I am able to produce this thesis. I give my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to my thesis supervisor Professor Randy Thaman for his guidance, hard work and making his time available in helping me. Also I thank Professor Leon Zann for his assistance and in providing his useful resource materials to help my research.

I am grateful to the AusAID for the financial sponsorship that enables me to finish this study especially Rosalyn Morgan and Olita Nagera of the office in Suva for their assistance.

I thank the pulenu’u (mayors) of Vailele (Sale’upolu), Ma’asina (Togia) and Ta’elefaga (Gago) who helped with the organization in villages and liaising with the village councils. In particular, I give my sincere thanks to Gago, the pulenuu of Ta’elefaga, and his family for the accommodation and their hospitality in my two weeks in Fagaloa. Also I thank all the children who were my research assistances at these villages.

I would also like to thank the following individuals: Palepa Amosa, the Samoan student counselor at USP and her family for the assistance and support. I am thankful and acknowledge the great help of Tolu Muliaina for the kind words of encouragement, his knowledge shared and his family for everything.

I also acknowledge the assistance of: the CEO, Luagalau Foisaga Shon, and the people at the Internal Affairs Office in Apia that liaised with the village mayors and making my fieldwork process easier; the Assistant CEO, Atonio Mulipola and particularly Anama Solofa, La’ulu Sione of the Fisheries Division; the CEO, Tu’u’u Taulealo and especially Telesia Sila and Molly of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment for helping with my archival research.

ii

Thanks to Sera Matai’a, the Principal and staff of the Catholic Senior School for the resource materials I borrowed from their library.

My gratitude to Lui Bell of the Ministry of Natural Resource and Eteuati Ropeti of the Fisheries Division, who were available for the conducted interviews. I am grateful for the kind assistance of Mrs Barbara Hau’ofa for editing my write-up, Sharon McGowan and Sala Vakalala at USP; Laulu Dan Stanley at Catholic Senior School for the use of his camera; Karl Adams at iPasifika and Dan at CSL for the laptops renting assistance. I am also grateful to the generosity and help of Semi Lesa who provided and assisted me in modifying my research site maps and aerial photographs. Thanks also to Shirley Atatagi (Greenpeace), Fiu Mataese (CEO of Siosiomaga Society) and Rita Ale for the information on environment concerns. I also thank Br. Carl Tapp for his continued words of encouragement and for sharing his wisdom and experiences.

I am also thankful to my flat mates and friends during our studies in Suva: Makerita and her family - Imeleta and my little friend Arasi for the daily entertainment, Br. Siaosi, Sr. Imakulata, Moira, Monica, Sandra, Isamaeli and Elvie Tamata and her family. Thanks to my friends, Mary and Toi for running my errands in Samoa and also their families for the support. Thanks to all my friends and students for the e-mails or forwards. To all those I came in contact with during this work and unable to name you all, thank you very much.

Last but not the least I give my special thanks to my mother, siblings, cousins and also my aiga (family) in Lefaga and Malie for prayers and everything.

Faafetai tele lava

iii

Dedication

This work is dedicated to the following people who inspired me and also struggled to provide the opportunities for the young generation in our family:

Tuaopepe Nise, Otila Sefo-Tuaopepe and Siainiusami Tuaopepe Sanerivi.

The coast of Gagaifolevao, Lefaga Bay at dusk

iv

ABSTRACT

The coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity provide fundamental resources for local communities of the Pacific Islands. The coast is the main area of settlement, agriculture and infra-structural development whilst the nearshore marine area is the main fishing ground of the Samoan, and other Pacific communities. Subsistence and artisanal fishing are significant in providing for the local people’s needs in substituting about half of their protein intake. Many activities along the coast and nearshore areas put pressure on resources such as coastal plants, sand and beaches as well as the inshore lagoon. Furthermore, the impacts of natural hazards like catastrophic cyclones exacerbate the destruction of these nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

This research assesses and discusses human impacts on the coasts and nearshore biodiversity of Samoa focusing on the four villages of Vailele near Apia and the rural villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa on the northeast coast and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga on the southwest coast of the Island of Upolu. Main human impacts at these areas include infra-structural development, particularly the Afulilo Dam that feeds the hydro-electricity power station at Ta’elefaga, which has caused the decline, scarcity and local depletion of some nearshore marine species. As a result, sedimentation into the lagoon has increased thus causing the death of more than half of the coral cover; eradication of the sea hare (gau) and pen shell (fole); the rarity of the finfish purse eye scad (atule), the sea cucumber - pricklyfish (sea mao'i), venus clam (tugane) and the decline of the boring sea urchin (tuitui) and other species as explained in the results.

In addition, high demand contributes to the over- harvesting of marine organisms resulting in the short supply of important species for consumption and sale, for example finfish, molluscs, echinoderms and crustaceans. Over-fishing has led to the decline of particular species such as the unicornfish (ili'ilia) at Gagaifolevao and Vailele, the steephead parrotfish (galo) and the humphead maori wrasse (malatea/tagafa) at the four study sites. Destructive fishing methods were used such as the fish poison tree (futu) and the Derris malaccensis (ava niukini). The coral smashing (sasa'e) method of fishing caused the decline of the gregory finfish (tu'u'u) at Vailele and the breaking of corals is still used to fish for sea anemone (lumane, matalelei) at Gagaifolevao for selling in the village or at the market in town.

Findings also from this research showed that cyclones were the main natural disasters that devastated the coastal and nearshore biodiversity of the study villages, particularly cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991, which deposited Island rubble banks on the reefs of Vailele and Ma'asina. One of the main problems encountered during the research was identifying vernacular names of some marine and plant species. This limitation and lack of traditional knowledge was mainly with the young age groups interviewed. The severe impacts affecting the coastal and nearshore areas and the loss of traditional knowledge as found out by this research need to be addressed. The involvement of local communities in conserving their resources will bolster their participation and concern and thus develop their sense of responsibility in sustainable management of their nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

v

TABLE OF CONTENT

Declaration of Originality i Acknowledgements ii Dedication iv Abstract v List of Tables ix List of Figures xiii List of Abbreviations xvii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT 6 1.3 HYPOTHESIS 7 1.4 OBJECTIVES 7 1.5 USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY 7 1.6 SELECTION OF RESEARCH TECHNIQUES 9 1.7 SELECTION OF STUDY VILLAGES 9 1.8 METHODOLOGY AND RECONNAISSANCE VISITS 10

1.8.1 Literature and Archival Research 11 1.8.2 Field Survey Methods and Analyses 11 1.8.3 Household Surveys 12 1.8.4 Fishers’ Group Questionnaire/Discussion 14 1.8.5 Participatory Observation with Fishers 14 1.8.6 Observation and Snorkeling 15 1.8.7 Fishers’ Creel Surveys 15 1.8.8 Recording/Observation of Coastal and Marine Activities 16 1.8.9 Interviews with Government Officials 16 1.8.10 Data Analyses 17

1.9 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE FIELDWORK METHODS 17 1.10 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS 20

CHAPTER TWO HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE 21BIODIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC REGION

2.1 INTRODUCTION 21 2.2 COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF 21

PACIFIC ISLANDS 2.3 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES 22 2.4 CORALS AND REEFS 23 2.5 COASTAL VEGETATION 24 2.6 IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES AND OTHER MARINE SPECIES 25

2.6.1 Finfishes 27 2.6.2 Shellfish and other Marine Species 28

2.7 IMPACTS AFFECTING COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 29 2.7.1 Tropical Cyclones 30

vi

2.7.2 Global Warming and Coral Bleaching 31 2.7.3 Coastal Deforestation and De-vegetation 32 2.7.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution 33 2.7.5 Mining 36 2.7.6 Infra-structural Impacts 39 2.7.7 Sedimentation and other Streams link Problems with Coasts 40

2.8 IMPACTS ON NEARSHORE MARINE AND FISHERIES 41 2.8.1 Over-harvesting and Exploited Species 42 2.8.2 Fishing Methods 45

2.9 VULNERALIBITY AND THREATS TO CORALS AND REEFS 47 2.10 MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 48 2.11 PACIFIC REGIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT 49

CHAPTER THREE SAMOA: BACKGROUND; COASTAL AND 50NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY AND ASSOCIATEDPROBLEMS

3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER 50 3.2 LOCATION AND POLITICAL HISTORY OF INDEPENDENT SAMOA 50 3.3 GEOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY 51 3.4 CLIMATE 52 3.5 FLORA 52 3.6 3.5.1 Littoral Vegetation 53 3.7 FAUNA 54 3.8 MARINE ENVIRONMENT 56

3.7.1 Fisheries 57 3.7.2 Finfishes 58 3.7.3 Commercial Contribution and Important Marine Species 59 3.7.4 Corals and Reefs 60

3.8 LAND AND MARINE TENURE 61 3.9 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES 63 3.10 DEMOGRAPHY 65 3.11 ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT 65 3.12 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 67

3.12.1 Natural Events 67 3.12.2 Coastal Deforestation and Reclamation 68 3.12.3 Sedimentation and other Stream Link Problems to 69

Nearshore Ecosystems 3.12.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution 70 3.12.5 Dredging and Sand Mining 71 3.12.6 Infra-structural Development and Impacts 71

3.13 OVER-HARVESTING AND EXPLOITATION OF MARINE SPECIES 73 3.13.1 Fishing Methods 75 3.13.2 Threats to Corals and Reefs 76 3.14 MANAGEMENT AND LEGISLATIONS 77

vii

CHAPTER FOUR STUDY VILLAGES AND COASTAL BIODIVERSITY 78

4.1 INTRODUCTION 78 4.2 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT 78 4.3 SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND GENDER ROLES 81 4.4 SOURCES OF INCOME IN RESEARCH VILLAGES 82 4.5 COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS OF STUDY 84

VILLAGES4.6 RESULTS: COASTAL VEGETATION AND USEFUL PLANTS 88 4.7 INFRA-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENTS AND IMPACTS 98 4.8 OTHER COASTAL IMPACTS: AGRICULTURE, LITTER AND SAND MINING 101

CHAPTER FIVE NEARSHORE MARINE BIODIVERSITY OF THE 102STUDY VILLAGES

5.1 INTRODUCTION 102 5.2 FISHERIES FOR SURVIVAL AND FISHING ACTIVITIES 102 5.3 CORALS AND REEFS 104 5.4 LARGE NEARSHORE FINFISHES 107

5.4.1 Abundance of Large Nearshore Finfishes 110 5.5 SMALL NEARSHORE FINFISHES 112

5.5.1 Fishers Creel Survey and Abundance of Small Finfishes 115 5.6 RAYS, SHARKS, MORAY EELS AND ABUNDANCE 120 5.7 MOLLUSCS 122

5.7.1 Large and Small Shellfishes 123 5.7.2 Creel Survey and Abundance of Molluscs 125

5.8 SEA CUCUMBERS, SEA URCHINS AND SEA STARS 129 5.8.1. Abundance of Sea cucumbers, Urchins and Stars 132

5.9 JELLYFISH, SEA ANEMONE, SEAWEEDS, SEA WORMS AND 133 ABUNDANCE 5.10 CRUSTACEANS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE 137 5.11 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE SPECIES 139 5.11.1 Sedimentation and Unclean Lagoon 140

5.11.2 Fishing Activities and Methods Used 140 5.11.3 Impacts of Natural Disasters 144 5.11.4 Agricultural and Waste Disposal Effects 146

5.12 MANAGEMENT IN THE STUDY VILLAGES 146

CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 148

6.1 INTRODUCTION 148 6.2 DISCUSSION AND CHANGES AFFECTING THE STUDY VILLAGES 148 6.3 MANAGEMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS 152 6.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 153

BIBLIOGRAPHY 155APPENDICES 165

viii

LIST OF TABLES PAGES

Table 1.1 Table showing household numbers at the time of survey and 12 the sample sizes of households interviewed in householdsurveys in the study villages

Table 2.1 Important coastal marine species resources at surveyed Islands 26

Table 2.2 Waste disposal figures for selected Pacific Island countries 34

Table 2.3 Exploitation of coastal materials in Pacific Island countries 37

Table 2.4 Plants used as poisons in the Pacific region 46

Table 3.1 Coral cover for Upolu and Savai’i Islands 61

Table 3.2 Total population of Samoa from 1976 – 2001 65

Table 3.3 Marine organisms now absent from Fagaloa Bay 73

Table 3.4 Summary of the six-monthly review of villages carried out in 77 December 2000

Table 4.1 Population of the Study Villages as of 2001 78

Table 4.2 List of plant species identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of 89 men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 4.3 List of plant species with medicinal uses identified in a sample 93 survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of UpoluIsland, Samoa during July to August 2004

ix

Table 4.4 List of plant uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of 95 men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 4.5 Perception that specified coastal plant species known and listed 97 have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004.

Table 5.1 Number of creel surveys/catches inventories during fieldwork in 104 four study villages in Samoa from July to August 2004

Table 5.2 Frequency that specified species of corals found and listed 105 in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.3 Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species 108 were listed as being among the 20 most significant, in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.4 Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species 111 were listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.5 Frequency with which specified small finfishes were listed as being 112 among the 20 most significant, nearshore species in a samplesurvey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.6 Frequency of finfish catches from fishers creel surveys at the study 115 villages during July to August 2004

x

Table 5.7 Fequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were 118 listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.8 Frequency with which specified species of sharks, rays and moray 121 eels are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of menand women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.9 Frequency of sharks and moray eels from the fishers’ creel surveys 122 at the four study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.10 Frequency with which specified molluscs species were known and 123 listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in fourvillages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.11 Frequency with which specified species of mollucss were known and 125 listed as declined, rare and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groupsof men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 5.12 Frequency of molluscs from the fishers’ creel surveys at the four 127 study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.13 Frequency with which specified species of sea-cucumbers, sea- 129 urchins and sea-stars were known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

xi

Table 5.14 Frequency of sea cucumbers and sea urchins from fishers creel 131 surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.15 Frequency with which specified species of sea cucumbers, sea 132 urchins and sea stars were known and listed as declined, becomerare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men andwomen in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July toAugust 2004

Table 5.16 Frequency with which specified species of jellyfish, sea-anemone, 134 seaweeds and sea worms were known and listed in a sample surveyon 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.17 Frequency with which specified species of sea-anemone, seaweeds, 135 and sea worms are known and listed has declined, become rare anddepleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in fourvillages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.18 Frequency with which specified crustacean species are known and 137 listed by fishers in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and womenin four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.19 Frequency of crabs and lobsters from fishers creel surveys at 139 the four study villages during July to August 2004

xii

LIST OF FIGURES PAGES

Figure 1.1 The distribution of true freshwater fishes, Nautilus, 3 fruit bats, and the giant clam Tridacna in the Pacific.

Figure 3.1 Map of the South Pacific Islands showing the location 51 of Samoa, the research country

Figure 3.2 Fishing areas 58

Figure 3.3 Fish uses 58

Figure 3.4 Map showing the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Pacific and Samoa 62

Figure 3.5 Volcanic formations and types of coastlines of Upolu Island 64

Figure 4.1 Map of Upolu Island showing the four study villages 79

Figure 4.2 The steep mountainous area of Fagaloa 80

Figure 4.3 Samoan social structure 81

Figure 4.4a Selling sea cucumbers and urchins at the roadside 83

Figure 4.4b Fisher gathering sea urchin (Vailele) 83

Figure 4.5 Households’ use of catch 83

Figure 4.6 Aerial photograph of Fagaloa showing river patterns and coastline 85

xiii

Figure 4.7 Aerial photograph of Lefaga showing the scattered the 86 settlement of Gagaifolevao

Figure 4.8 The west area lagoon of Gagaifo showing corals, fringing reef 87 and Masavai pocket beach

Figure 4.9 Aerial photograph of Vailele showing dense population, lagoon 88 and reef area

Figure. 4.10 Mangrove community on the east end of Ta’elefaga Village 91

Figure 4.11 Swamp at Gagaifo Village 91

Figure 4.12a Spring water pool at Vailele providing fresh water for cooking, 92 washing and bathing

Figure 4.12b Brackish water on the coast of Gagaifo use for bathing and washing 92

Figure 4.13a Planting coconut for coastal protection at the east end of Gagaifo 96

Figure 4.13b Tropical almond and coconut trees along the shore of Ma’asina 96

Figure 4.14a Rock seawall for coastal protection from wave erosion at 98 Ta’elefaga River mouth

Figure 4.14b A coral rubble seawall built by a family at Vailele 98

Figure 4.15a Discolored lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village due to wastewater from 99 the hydro-electric power station

Figure 4.15b Murky lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village 99

xiv

Figures 4.16 a–d Coastal erosion along the shores of the study villages 100

Figure 4.17a Children at Vailele mining sand for beautification of house 101 surroundings

Figure 4.17b Sand mining at Gagaifo for construction purposes 101

Figure 5.1a Consumption per week in households at the four study villages 102

Figure 5.1b Uses of fishers’ catches in the four villages 103

Figures 5.2a Cooked crab, moray eels & bottle of sea cucumber/gonads 103

Figure 5.2b Cooked large finfish and lobster for visitor’s meal 103

Figure 5.3a Soft corals at Gagaifo 105

Figure 5.3b Healthy plate corals at Gagaifo 106

Figure 5.3c Regenerating corals at Gagaifo 106

Figure 5.4a Degraded corals at Ta’elefaga 107

Figure 5.4b Dead tops of Porites at Ta’elefaga 107

Figures 5.5a–e Some important large finfishes caught at the study villages during 109 the time of the fieldwork

Figure 5.6a-g Some important small finfishes, eels and sharks caught at the 119 study villages

xv

Figure 5.7a-f Some important shellfishes at the study villages 124

Figures 5.8a-f Some important sea cucumbers and other marine species 130 at the study villages

Figure 5.9a-l Other important marine species at the study villages 136

Figure 5.10a-h Crustaceans seen at the study villages 138

Figure 5. 11 Methods of fishing used at the study villages 142

Figure 5.12a-c Some fishing methods and activities at the study villages 142

Figure 5.13 Hours and tides of fishing 143

Figures 5.14a-c Diving/spearing night fishers' catches 144

Figures 5.15a-b Rubble banks deposited on the reefs by cyclones Ofa (1990) 144 and Val (1991)

Figure 5.16 Coast of Gagaifo Village flattened by cyclone Ofa leaving fewer 145 coastal plants

Figure 5.17: Coastal road at Fagaloa next to the sea as seen at Salimu Village 145 (west of Ta'elefaga)

xvi

xvii

List of Abbreviations

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FFA Forum Fisheries Agency IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources MPA Marine Protected Areas SIDS Small Island Developing States SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community SPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCAP United Nation Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The environment and natural resources worldwide are deteriorating at an alarming rate as escalating population growth generates increasing economic and other human activities. This has developed the environmentalists’ awareness because a lot of changes have been experienced globally, such as more frequent occurrence of extreme natural events. These natural hazards have severe impacts on the vulnerable environment of small Islands of the Pacific with their limited resources, especially when those resources have been degraded or over-exploited (SPREP, 1994b).

The coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity are the most fundamental and significant resources that Pacific Islands depend on for their necessities (FAO, 2002). These ecosystems have the most useful terrestrial and marine resources, are the most heavily settled, and are the most susceptible to changes by natural and human activities as many results of these human induced actions end up affecting the coastal zone and the sea.

The coastal zone is “the interface between the land and sea and includes the relevant components of the adjacent terrestrial and marine areas” (McLean 1991 in SPREP, 1994b). McLean (1991) explained that coastal zones were determined by the outcome of interactions and linkages in the past and present between the land and sea. Furthermore, climatic changes and physical processes play a major role in present coastal zones and these changes are quite obvious on islands with their fragile island environments (SPREP, 1994b).

Coastal and nearshore areas encompass a large number of ecosystems, which have a great diversity of non-living and living resources. These include the sub-tidal zone, which is normally submerged at low tide, the inter-tidal zone, which is normally emerged at low tide and submerged at high tide and the nearshore coastal zone or supra-tidal area.

1

The diversity of inter-tidal and supra-tidal ecosystems consists of exposed coral reefs and reef flats, mangrove swamps, marsh wetlands, coastal littoral forest and rocky and sandy beaches that are home to numerous coastal plants and nearshore marine organisms and other species like sea birds. Mangroves and reef communities are significant on Islands because these provide protection for coasts and also for the regeneration of many marine organisms.

Diversity of nearshore subtidal marine ecosystems include lagoons, fringing and barrier reefs, corals with a high diversity of marine species including large and small finfish, shellfish, sea grasses, seaweeds and several other marine organisms.

Corals, reefs and marine life play a major role in the Pacific for island formation and protection such as providing habitats and food for many nearshore marine species. Coral reefs constitute the primary coastal protection structures on most tropical small Islands as well as providing sand for the formation of atoll islets and beaches (SPREP, 1996).

Samoa like many small Pacific Islands has relatively high biodiversity but limited area and marine productivity and thus limited in terms of natural resources. The biodiversity of Pacific Islands have high levels of species endemism due to their location further away from the Indo-southwest Pacific, the source area of organisms’ dispersal. There is less variety of biodiversity of coastal plants and marine species on the Polynesian Islands compared to the bigger and older Melanesian islands of Papua New Guinea, New Caledonia, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji (Kay, 1999).

The distribution of marine resources is similar to that of terrestrial resources in richness with the highest diversity of species being in the west and decreasing towards the eastern Pacific (Figure. 1.1) (Kay, 1999).

2

Figure 1.1: The distribution of true freshwater fishes, Nautilus, fruit bats, and the giant clam Tridacna in the Pacific. Dropouts like these animals contribute to species attenuation west to east in the Pacific.

Source: Kay (1999)

… to move inwards from the Cook Islands to Tonga is to move from bare and barren reef flats to communities of sea grasses and mangroves, abundant ophiuroids (sea stars)and probably twice as many genera of reef building corals: ( Stoddart, 1976 in Kay, 1999)

Figure 1.1 shows the attenuation of some species indicating the decrease of species diversity towards the eastern Pacific from the centre of diversity from the source area in the western Pacific. The dropoff in diversity of terrestrial species is greater compared to marine because marine species are more mobile due to ocean currents that aid the dispersal of marine organisms. This is an important contributing factor to high endemism of land biota and to the low endemism of marine biota (Kay, 1999).

The limit size and biological productivity trends are of significance to Pacific Island nations because of their dependence on limited resources available to them that the coastal and nearshore areas provide.

3

The biodiversity of plants, animals and marine resources in the Pacific are critical to the livelihoods of local communities. As Thaman (1994) stresses:

Biodiversity is not income that should be spent or destroyed. It is the ‘capital’ needed for development and maintenance of Pacific societies which ‘subsistence affluence’ and almost all ‘income’ (both cash and non-cash) is derived. It is the foundation of their

culture.

Inshore lagoons and reefs are the most important fishing grounds not only in Samoa but also in the Pacific region for consumption and currently for commercial or artisanal fisheries. Adams etal. (1996) reported that subsistence fishery accounted for 80% of the annual inshore fishery production in the Pacific Island countries.

Low-lying Islands and atoll countries such as Kiribati, Tuvalu, Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia are the most dependent on fisheries resources for subsistence consumption compared to high Islands that have other sources of food (Gillet and Lightfoot, 2002). This indicates the significance of coastal and nearshore areas in subsistence fishing and earning income for Island people and countries. FAO (2002) reported that subsistence fisheries of Pacific Islands capture about 102,000 mt per year (about 70%) of the total harvest from coastal areas.

Worldwide the coastal areas are the main areas of settlement and developments. The Earth Summit report 1992 stated that more than 50% of the world’s population lives within 60km of the shoreline and this could increase to three quarters by the year 2020 (Quarrie, 1992). Not only does the majority of the human population live in coastal areas, but more than half of the people live in less developed countries (Barnabé and Barnabé, 1997).

Traditionally people in the Pacific Islands settled along the coasts where there is easy access to marine resources and services that provide for their livelihood. Urbanization has intensified the focus on coastal resources because high populations are now more densely concentrated along these flat coastal areas. This is the case in main Pacific Island urban areas such as Suva, Fiji; Honiara, Solomon Islands; Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea; Port Vila, Vanuatu; Oahu, Hawaii; and Apia, Samoa on high Islands; and South Tarawa and Funafuti on the small atolls of Kiribati and Tuvalu. In Marshall Islands the urban growth is 8.2%; for Ebeye and its population density it

4

is now over 23,200 per km². Similarly, the urban growth rates for Pago Pago, American Samoa and Port Vila, Vanuatu are 7.3% whilst Honiara, Solomons is 6.2% per year (UNESCAP, 2000).

The rapid improvement of infra-structure, services and communication as indicators of economic growth is leading to the rapid change in people’s way of life in villages. In the Pacific, subsistence fishing is the most important in rural areas however as rural economies become increasingly monetized, theres gradual move away from fishing for home consumption only but towards fishing as a means of generating cash income (FAO, 2002).

There are many potential uses and developments that exist and compete for space in the coastal zone in the Pacific. These include settlement, manufacturing industries, infrastructure, tourism and recreation, agriculture as well as commercial and subsistence fishing. As more development focuses along the coasts, coastal ecosystems and biodiversity are increasingly exposed to threats leading to problems such as coastal erosion, coral and reef degradation, marine pollution and loss of coastal and marine biodiversity.

Coastal and nearshore ecosystems of Pacific Islands are fragile and susceptible to both human activities and natural disasters such as tropical cyclones. Natural disasters are frequently affecting Pacific Island coastal areas; for example Cyclone Heta in January 2004 devastated property and the environment of Niue before it hit Tokelau and to a lesser extent the Samoa Islands. Tropical cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991 devastated the coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of Samoa. Zann (1991) noted the severe destruction caused by cyclone Ofa on reefs such as the long wide emergent cyclone banks formed along almost all of the reef crests and tops along the west and east areas from Apia.

The situation of coastal and nearshore reef and marine resources in Samoa is deteriorating due to great pressure from human activities and exacerbated by cyclones. Over ten years ago, studies by Zann (1991a; 1991b) raised concerns on damage to lagoon and reef areas and Taulealo (1993) stated that lagoons and reefs of Western Samoa are amongst the most degraded in the Pacific. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries estimated that 90% of the coral reef around Apia is dead (Taulealo, 1993).

5

The nature of island origins, their small sizes, isolation and unique fragile environments and ecosystems expose them to many environmental dangers. Therefore there is a need for PacificIsland countries to take action in conservation measures to protect coastal ecosystems, biodiversity and other unique resources and species within coastal low-lying habitats. Modern and traditional management plans need to be incorporated in order to preserve coastal and nearshore marine resources that Pacific Islands depend heavily on.

In this research, coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity refers to the coast, lagoon and reef ecosystems. Associated problems that exist at these zones within the four study sites on the Island of Upolu is also discussed.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Loss of coastal and marine biodiversity is disastrous for island nations that have fragile ecosystems. Human actions and extreme natural hazards like tropical cyclones, coral bleaching and sea-level rise are degrading coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity of Pacific Islands and Samoa alike.

Coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems face pollution from household disposal; manufacturing effluents; coastal erosion not only from cyclones but also structures like seawalls; coastal deforestation; agriculture; sand mining; reclamation and settlement as well as efficient and destructive fishing techniques. These problems threaten the existence and availability of marine and coastal organisms. Taylor (1991) stated that sediment and nutrient pollution of lagoons is damaging the reef system in Western Samoa and this contributed to the collapse of the inshore fishery (Taulealo, 1993).

Many fish and marine organisms are endangered as they become scarce now or even depleted due to habitat loss and exploitation for commercial and subsistence uses. The significance of small-scale or artisanal fishery and subsistence fishing is usually overlooked but these activities are the main causes of over-harvesting, over-fishing and coral destruction.

6

1.3 HYPOTHESIS

Human activities have exploited coastal and nearshore ecosystems at an accelerating rate and these effects have been exacerbated by the impacts of tropical cyclones.

1.4 OBJECTIVES

The overall objective is to discuss the importance of coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity and investigate the natural and human impacts that affect the nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of selected sites on the northeast and south coast of Upolu, the main island of Samoa. The specific objectives are to:

Identify the main coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems at selected sites as well as discussing their importance to the environment and people

Assess and discuss the effects of developments and people’s activities as well as natural hazards on the coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity

Describe the factors and reasons that drive people to put pressure on their coastal and nearshore marine resources

State the policies and management plans that the government, agencies and local communities have in relation to people’s actions and the uses of these coastal ecosystems and marine resources

Recommend measures to minimize and monitor the problems of coastal pollution and nearshore marine pressure and exploitation.

1.5 USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY

Interest in this particular topic was aroused by the fact that although coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems provide the most significant resources to our small Pacific Islands and communities, they are not well managed and are being degraded at a frightening rate. Whilst these areas are the focus of development activities in Samoa and other Pacific Islands they are also the most vulnerable to global environment changes. Developing local people’s sense of responsibility needs to be addressed in order to protect the vulnerable coastal and nearshore biodiversity in both the Pacific Islands and Samoa.

7

This study examines the significance of coastal and nearshore ecosystems and discusses the implications of human activities and natural hazards, particularly tropical cyclones on these areas. The biodiversity of these areas is vital in the Pacific and the local communities need to manage and minimize pressure on limited resources available instead of prioritizing economic but exploitative effects.

The growing populations of the Pacific Islands and Samoa rely heavily on coastal and nearshore areas for a significant proportion of their daily needs. As a result these low-lying areas are susceptible to many pressing environmental problems such as coastal erosion, water and marine pollution, habitat loss for many organisms such as those in mangrove areas, destruction of coral reefs due to pollution and sedimentation and over-exploitation and loss of biodiversity. The economic needs of our local communities to survive must be compatible with sustaining our environment by using appropriate measures.

Governments, communities and individuals understand that we depend on coastal and nearshore marine resources but needs to increase awareness to recognize the significance of our biodiversity and how living organisms in these ecosystems interact. Nonetheless, the surge of economic growth and benefits should not neglect our future need for this same coastal biodiversity inheritance. The governments and communities must implement legislation and policies that are already in place but have not been acted upon as well as adopting new strategies that can promote the sustainable use of coastal ecosystems and biodiversity.

By developing increased public awareness of these pressing issues we can hopefully provide sustainable means to maintain our environment’s equilibrium so that future generations will survive in a healthy environment.

The government, local communities and individuals need to take the initiative to develop and be responsible for the sustainable use of their own environment to support them and future generations. Awareness of the problems will also hopefully lead to the implementation of measures that the government and village communities can use for better decision-making and to conserve their resources in a sustainable way.

8

1.6 SELECTION OF RESEARCH TECHNIQUES

A variety of qualitative and quantitative methods were used to gather and analyse the information to achieve the objectives and goals of this study. Literature and archival research highlighted the importance and status of coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems in the Pacific Islands and Samoa. Reconnaissance visits to prospective study villages of Gagaifolevao and Vailele evaluated their relevance for use in the research. Literature provided some information on the impacts of the hydro electricity Dam on the coast and lagoon of Fagaloa Bay, thus the reason for the using of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina villages from this area.

Household surveys, fishers’ creel surveys and detailed group questionnaires identified the nearshore resources that are considered to be common and endangered. These also explained the factors that pressure people to exploit these ecosystems and organisms.

Interviews with key government officials were carried out to identify the current conservation efforts used to manage coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity at both the national and local community level. Other techniques used included participant observation, snorkelling and recording of coastal activities seen at the coastal areas of the study villages.

1.7 SELECTION OF STUDY VILLAGES

The following factors were taken into consideration in the selection of the four villages studied in this research.

The northeast coast of Upolu Island is less studied compared to the flat and densely populated northwest coast. The three villages selected from the coast northeast of Apia were Vailele; Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, both rural villages on Fagaloa Bay. The fourth village was Gagaifolevao on the south coast of Upolu.

Vailele near Apia Town is a densely populated and a rapidly urbanizing village. It is also a fishing village in which women fishers play a vital role in fishing activities.

9

Infra-structural development like boulders seawalls and roads affected the coastal areas of the study villages. The establishment of the hydroelectricity power station greatly affects the coast of both Ta’elefaga and neighbouring Ma’asina, and has contributed to the loss and decline of some marine organisms from Fagaloa Bay.

Gagaifolevao, commonly known as Gagaifo, on the south coast of Upolu, has experienced marine commercial activities such as the exploitation of coral and fish for the marine aquarium trade and also had participated in the Fishing Extension Programme (now known as the Samoa Fisheries Project by the Fisheries Department).

These reasons plus other impacts of human activities and natural disasters, such as the damaged caused by recent tropical cyclones were basis for the selection of these villages as study sites. The fieldwork at Gagaifo and Vailele were carried out in July and Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in August 2004. After fieldwork at each of the four study villages, a week was allocated for archival research to gather information from the Fisheries Division and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and the Nelson Memorial Library in Apia as well as contacting village mayors to arrange accommodation and the fieldwork schedules in their villages.

1.8 METHODOLOGY AND RECONNAISSANCE VISITS

Reconnaissance visits to Vailele and Gagaifo villages were carried out to view the coastal zones of these areas. This was useful in getting the general views of the villagers about the situation of their nearshore marine resources and also the existence of coastal problems. Previous studies and environmental impact assessments of the hydroelectricity dam provided some information about its impact on Fagaloa area.

The Internal Affairs Office provided assistance and collaborated with village mayors (pulenu’u) in the study villages and requested official permission for the fieldwork to be carried out in their villages. With this help no formal meetings with village councils were necessary except a meeting of the researcher with the village mayors to explain and clarify the purpose of the

10

research and how it would be carried out in their villages. The village mayors liaised with their village councils for permission in allowing the research to take place and for access to selected cultural groups for discussions.

The fieldwork was carried out in the four villages from the first week of July to the last week of August 2004. The study first started at Gagaifo village for two and a half weeks as the weather was not favourable for fishers and many other nearshore activities. One and a half weeks were spent at Vailele Village and one week each at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

1.8.1 Literature and Archival Research

The literature review and archival research provided information on coastal and nearshore biodiversity of the Pacific region in general and Samoa in particular. The information collected was from various resource centres such as the Pacific Islands Marine Resource Information Service (PIMRIS) and the USP Library at Laucala Campus, Suva; The Nelson Memorial Library, the Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment and the Fisheries Department in Apia, Samoa; and the Internet or (WWW).

1.8.2 Field Survey Methods and Analyses

Data collection used in the four selected villages employed the following techniques: -

Household surveys

Fishers group questionnaire/discussions

Participatory observation with fishers

Observation and snorkelling

Fishers’ creel surveys

Recorded observations of coastal and marine activities in every two hours

Interviews with government officials from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and the Fisheries Division

SPSS and Excel computer programmes were used to analyze the group questionnaires, household and fishers’ creel surveys

11

The forms used for household and fishers’ creel surveys and also in recording coastal and marine activities are attached with guidelines of tasks instructions in Appendices 1a–1e. The group questionnaire was constructed with the help of the thesis supervisor, Professor Randy Thaman, and the creel and household surveys were revised from the forms used and provided by Professor Leon Zann from his previous work in Samoa.

1.8.3 Household Surveys

The household surveys sample sizes depended on the number of households per village and were selected randomly. In small villages such as Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, every third household was interviewed whilst every fifth household were interviewed in the large villages of Gagaifo and Vailele (see Appendix Ib for the form used).

The total sampled number for the small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, which had 30 or less household, was 5 and 8 households, respectively. In the large villages of Gagaifo and Vailele, 15 and 20 households were interviewed (Table 1.1). The majority of the people interviewed at these households were the household cooks, wives of fishers and female fishers, although sometimes both the male fisher and his wife were respondents.

Table 1.1: Table showing the number of households and the sample sizes of households interviewed in the household surveys in the study villages

VILLAGES Vailele Ma’asina Ta’elefaga Gagaifo

Total no. of Households 87* 18 24 68

No. of Sampled households 20 5 8 15

* Not the total number of households in the whole village but household numbers along the coast only in the vicinity of the village

The numbers of households (Table 1.1) counted at the time of the research in Ma’asina, Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo provided the sampling frame for the sampled household interviews, rather than the household number recorded by the Samoa 2001 census.

The numbers of households shown and used were the total number as counted in the three villages. For Vailele Village the number used was based on the estimated 80–90 households

12

located near the coast within the immediate vicinity of the main village. These households are under the traditional village council and also participate in traditional and customary activities in the village.

Household surveys at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga were easy to conduct as they are small concentrated villages with few households that spread along the coastal road. Households at Gagaifo were more dispersed from the coast towards inland and they were all included.

The interviewed households in these four villages consisted of extended families and large and small immediate families known as iga. The iga consist of a chief and his/her immediate family or extended families including relatives that live in the household. Large immediate families were composed of the chief and spouse, their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.

For the purpose of this research a household referred to either extended or immediate families that eat together. Large extended and immediate families that live next to each other but prepare and eat separately were counted as different households. This was because the household survey was concerned with what the households consume daily, whether they had fish and seafood or other food types.

More than half of Vailele’s dense population lives on freehold lands further inland that had been sold to incoming people. Most of these new migrants are not under the cultural system of the village council (fono) and were not included in the household survey.

The households near the coast of Vailele who among are the main users of the village fishing area and coastal resources were included in the household surveys. Even though the inland households were excluded from the household surveys these people were included in the fishers’ creel surveys although during the study there were no fishers from these inland households. There were, however, a few male fishers from other neighbouring villages encountered during the creel surveys.

13

1.8.4 Fishers’ Group Questionnaire/Discussion

This technique was modified from its original proposed method of using everyone in the cultural or social groups that exist in villages such as the groups of chiefs, chiefs’ wives, untitled young men and the young women. This method was altered due to budget or financial constraints of the research as it was dealing with more than one village.

Consequently, the social groups’ questionnaires/discussion targeted only men and women fishers and the number of groups varied in villages due to the number of fishers. The small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga had a small number of households that range from 16 to 25 and there were fewer fishers too. In these villages fishers’ were grouped into one male and one female group for discussion and these groups each consisted of 6 fishers.

In Vailele and Gagaifo that contained more fishers, there was one group for women; a group for older male fishers or chiefs and another group for the young untitled male fishers. The three groups in each village consisted of 6 members and were also interviewed. Because there were not many women fishers in the four villages they were all put into one group; these groups contained 6 women fishers each and 7 in the group at Vailele.

The questionnaires used in these group discussions were long and detailed and each questionnaire usually lasted for two or two and half hours’ maximum (see Appendix Ie). For this reason the time allocated for these questionnaires was usually in the evenings and the male group at Ta’elefaga took place on a Sunday evening.

1.8.5 Participatory Observation with Fishers

Participatory observation included going out with male and female fishers that fish on the shore, reefs and the lagoon. Women fishers were easy to accompany as they fish mainly in daytimewithin the lagoon or on the reef especially at Vailele Village where a lot of women fishers went out fishing for sea cucumbers, sea hares and sea urchins at low tide.

14

Male fishers were also accompanied especially those using cast nets, hook and lines as well as eel traps as they usually fish along the shore, lagoon and on the reefs. On some occasions fishers on canoes were accompanied when they went out fishing in the lagoon and reefs using gillnets. Male fishers diving with spears were awaited on shore when they returned ashore and many of them fished at nighttime especially on Friday and Saturday nights.

Participating with and accompanying fishers was vital to observe problems concerning the status of fishing grounds and corals, the species that were normally found, the techniques used as well as becoming familiar with the local names of species.

1.8.6 Observation and Snorkelling

Observation on land and snorkelling underwater allowed for the firsthand identification of coastal plants, nearshore marine species and associated problems as well as confirming the concerns raised and discussed in the interviews and questionnaires.

Snorkelling was significant, interesting and informative to observe the situation of the inshore lagoons of the four villages. At the villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga snorkelling in the inshore lagoon was carried out from shore across the reef and from the reef to the shore.

At Vailele, snorkelling was carried out at high tide because the lagoon is too shallow during low tide, during which time observation was carried out by walking from shore to the reef. The reefs of all villages were visited at low tides, sometimes with fishers. Snorkelling was carried out in different sites of Gagaifo also from the shore to the reef to observe most parts of the inshore in order to view the health of corals and associated problems.

1.8.7 Fishers’ Creel Surveys

The creel survey recorded the fishers’ daily catches when they returned from fishing to identify the quantity and sizes of the various species caught. The catches/species were recorded in the Samoan vernacular as identified by the fishers (see Appendix Ic for the form used). Sea cucumbers gonads as well as other seafood for which the quantity was difficult to calculate

15

accurately were recorded as numbers of bottles. This was after the women fishers cleaned, cut and bottled them in plastic bottles before selling on the roadside or use for family consumption.

The creel surveys attempted to determine the abundance of marine species that are common, declining or the types that have become rare. It also allowed for the observation of various fishing techniques used by fishers and the particular fishes these methods targeted. It also provided information on species that are commercially valuable and those used only for subsistence consumption.

1.8.8 Recording/Observation of Coastal and Marine Activities

Observing and recording of coastal and nearshore marine activities were carried out daily during the time of the fieldwork in each of the villages except Sundays and this usually started at 6:00am until 6:00pm.

This task recorded all kinds of human activities that occurred along the coast and shoreline in every two hours of the day as well as the fishing activities and fishing methods being used. This method identified other uses of coastal and nearshore resources apart from fishing (see Appendix Id for the form used).

1.8.9 Interviews with Government Officials

Key resource people interviewed were from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmentand the Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.

These interviews were carried out in February 2005 with the Principal Fisheries Officer, Magele Eteuati Ropeti, the coordinator of the Samoa Fisheries Project that deals with village community marine reserves and Lui Bell from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, who provided information concerning the marine reserve projects under this Ministry such as the marine protected areas (MPA) at Aleipata and Safata Villages.

16

1.8.10 Data Analyses

The SPSS programme was used to enter and analyze data of households and fishers’ creel surveys. Totals gained from SPSS analysis were entered into the Excel programme and produced the graphs used.

1.9 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE FIELDWORK METHODS

The techniques and methods used in any survey have their advantages and weaknesses so in this research various methods were used to strengthen the limitation of one particular technique as well as to achieve the objectives of the research.

The benefit of using household surveys (Appendix Ib) in each village was to get information of the villagers’ food type consumption. The disadvantage of this survey was the inconsistency of information from the household interviewees especially in listing the kinds of food they ate the previous day or the food they ate in that week. In order to avoid some unreliable information the cooks (usually the fishers’ wives) were sought out to give accounts of the food consumed the previous day or for that week.

Creel surveys (Appendix Ic) conducted on the shores recorded the fishers’ catches and this was relevant to witness the type of finfish, shellfish and other seafood that are common and rare. This method idenitified the species that people preferred for consumption and for sale.

Observation of fishing methods and activities assisted in finding out the types that were used or which are more efficient, as well as identifying species caught with particular fishing techniques. The problem encountered with this method was the irregular times of fishing that depended on the tides, for example during night low tides fishers come back late at night. It was easier to record catches of night fishers that lived near the place the researcher stayed; those living at far distances were recorded early the next morning. But there were cases where some night fishers left early the following morning on the first bus to take their catches to the market, or even sold them before the researcher had the opportunity to record their night catches.

17

This was the problem encountered with leaving night fishers’ catches until morning so the researcher usually awaited and recorded the night fishers’ catches on shore until 12:00am and only those that came later were recorded the following morning. Sometimes, especially on Saturday nights, many fishers went out fishing and their catches were recorded very early on Sunday morning before they had prepared their earthen oven (umu).

Since the researcher worked alone it was difficult to record all fishers catches, especially night fishers or when many women fishers came back together at different locations, mainly when the tide started to come in. To avoid this with some cases at Vailele, children helped by asking fishers at other locations to wait for the researcher recording catches at another site.

Some fishers also tried to avoid the recording of their catches. They were suspicious and hesitant especially when their catches included undersized species however they were informed that the research is not a survey to record illegal activities or government regulations but for studies purposes. Groups’ discussions (Appendix Ie) sometimes were difficult to facilitate, as there were people that sometimes dominated group discussions. To minimize this, the questions were sometimes asked directly to a person and then elaborated by the others. Also older chiefs/fishers were separated from the untitled young men’s group to avoid this problem.

Participatory observation and snorkelling were good ways in actively taking part with fishers’ tasks and at the same time asking them informal questions about village problems concerning their coastal and nearshore environment. Snorkelling was carried out to witness the situation of corals and reefs as well as identifying the species found at various sites.

Another way of gaining accurate information was taking the village children, who usually fish on the shore and were interested and honest with their responses. The children were keen and helpful assistants that accompanied the researcher on observation and in identifying some of the marine species on the beaches. They also showed places to find some of the organisms that were stated by the older people and even recorded by written reports as being locally depleted from Fagaloa nearshore marine.

18

The other main problem was the lack of knowledge among the younger age groups of the vernacular names of some coastal plants and marine species. There were also other constraints encountered. For example, two weeks were allocated for the two villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa but because the village mayor of Ma’asina was away in some days during the fieldwork, accommodation was not available in this village. Ta’elefaga then was the main place of accommodation within these two weeks and recording night creel survey was difficult at night particularly due to walking back and forth from Ta’elefaga. Recording night fishers’ catches at Ma’asina was then carried out early the following morning but it was usually difficult to find out who had gone out fishing the night before.

The schedule with group discussions at Vailele has been postponed often because the village social groups of untitled men (aumaga) and young women (aualuma) were practicing their cricket teams that participated in the Teuila Festival. The village mayor had a heavy schedule at the time and accommodation at his place was not possible due to the time of the research. The researcher then stayed and commute from Tulaele, another village within Apia Town and conducted the fieldwork including the night creel surveys.

Although the village mayors liaised first with the village councils for their approval and to explain the purpose of the study as well as notifying the fishers about the group questionnaires surveys, some fishers did not come at the allocated time so the questionnaires were postponed a few times at all villages. This was to suit the fishers’ convenience and also to have more time for the detailed questionnaires that usually took two hours to complete. The fishers were then compensated with $10 per person as an appreciation of their time given for this task.

At Gagaifo Village a new village mayor (pulenu’u) started the week the research commenced and a problem which broke out within the village chief council of chiefs (fono) resulted to the split-up of the council into two sides. The researcher then had to contact individual fishers and explain to them the nature of the study and to find a time suitable for the discussions. The meeting times had changed a few times to accommodate everyone concerned.

19

Another setback was the change of weather. For example, the first week at Vailele was windyand the currents were a bit strong so there were few fishing activities in the first four days. The work here at Vailele was then carried out for a week and a half and during nighttime of the first week there were not many diving fishers due to the full moon, except for a few that collected invertebrates. Wind and strong currents also delayed work at Gagaifo Village as well and it then had to be carried out for nearly three weeks.

1.10 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

The thesis is composed of six chapters. Chapter one consists of the introduction, the problem statement, objectives and discusses the methods used in the fieldwork. The second chapter is a review of literature relating to the topic focusing on the Pacific region. It explains the status of coastal and nearshore ecosystems in the Pacific Islands and the human and natural impacts that affect these areas.

Chapter three reviews the literature but concentrate particularly on Samoa, mainly on Upolu Island where the research sites are located. First it provides background information on Samoa concerning its population, economy and basic features of the natural environment. The second part describes the coastal ecosystems and biodiversity of Samoa and coastal problems.

The fourth chapter identifies the case study areas and locations. It discusses the coastal ecosystems of the four village sites and their situations as well as the impacts of human activities on these ecosystems.

In chapter five the nearshore marine biodiversity of the study areas is described and the problems that influence these ecosystems and biodiversity are evaluated.

The last chapter concludes and sums up the thesis as well as stating some recommendations for further research and actions. These are to address problems faced by coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of particular villages, but also more widely to all areas in Samoa and others in the Pacific Islands.

20

CHAPTER TWO HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC

REGION

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Islands of the Pacific have limited mineral and other terrestrial resources and they depend greatly on coastal and marine resources for a large proportion of their social and economicneeds. According to FAO (1994) 47% of the world’s fisheries production occurs in the Asia-Pacific region, which is also the centre of global mariculture that has major consequences for coastal habitats and coastal water quality (UNEP, 1996). In the Pacific, subsistence fisheries involve a large variety of species such as finfish, molluscs, crustaceans, algae and other groups (FAO, 2002).

This chapter focuses on the importance of coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity and associated problems caused by natural and human activities in the small Island developing states (SIDS) in the Pacific region.

2.2 COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF PACIFIC ISLANDS

The coastal and nearshore ecosystems of the Pacific Islands cover a wide range of biodiversity that people and other organisms depend upon.

Burke et al. (2001), stated that coastal and nearshore ecosystems:

host the world’s primary ports of commerce

are the primary producers of fish, shellfish and seaweed for both human and animal consumption

are considerable source of fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, household products and construction materials

encompass a broad range of habitat types

store and cycle nutrients

21

harbour a wealth of species and genetic diversity

filter pollutants from inland freshwater systems

help to protect shorelines from erosion and storms and

used for human settlement, development and many other needs.

The heavy dependence of Pacific Islands on coastal and nearshore ecosystems puts pressure on the equilibrium and survival of the resources and biodiversity of these areas. Pacific Islands vary in their ecological, geological and geographical nature of origins between the high islands of Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa and the smaller low-lying Islands and atolls such as those of Tonga, Nauru, Niue, Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu. However, they face similar consequences of environmental issues due to their comparable island ecosystems and climates and the high dependence on coastal zone resources.

2.3 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES

The maximum elevation of many Small Island Developing States (SIDS) ranges from 1–5 metres above mean sea level and this makes these Islands entirely coastal in terms of systems interaction, their influence by the sea, their geographical disposition and their relative relief (Maharaj, c.2001). Consequently, such small island states depend disproportionately on coastal fisheries and marine organisms for survival compared to high Islands that have other terrestrial alternative sources of food and ample land for agriculture and farming.

The coastal zones of the Pacific region are dependent upon the climate and physical characteristics such as oceanographic processes that determine variations in coastal zone characteristics (Gillie, 1994). Coastal zone ecosystems are particularly susceptible to changes due to natural hazards and human activities.

Beaches are vital and extensively developed along coasts and are the most mobile of coastal environments (Sherwood and Howorth, 1996). Human developments along beaches can change habitats and beaches. For example, Burne (1991) explained that jetties, breakwaters and other

22

structures can upset the natural equilibrium of coastal zones and sometimes cause disastrous impacts.

Coasts and beaches are also significant natural ecosystems that offer attractive resources for the development of the tourism industry within the Pacific region. Tourism is earning an increasingly large proportion of income for many Pacific Islands and is currently a popular development alternative as there are few income earning opportunities in the resource impoverished nations of the Pacific that depend largely on agriculture, forestry, fisheries and a few manufacturing industries. The World Tourism Organization estimated the total tourism receipts in the Pacific Islands to be about 25% of total export earnings (FAO, 1994).

In the Pacific, especially in Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa, almost all their tourist facilities are along the coasts and beaches and depend on coastal resources as a major attraction. In Fiji, for example, most of the resorts are located along the southwest coast of Viti Levu and in the Mamanucas and the Yasawa Island groups in the west. In terms of tourist activities, sport or game fishing and diving are significant economic components of tourism in the Pacific (FAO, 1994). The World Bank (c.2001) noted that in Palau and Kiribati tourism is based primarily on marine-based activities such as diving and sports fishing.

2.4 CORALS AND REEFS

Corals are complex symbiotic ecosystems that depend on clean water and sunlight to provide food through photosynthesis for growth. “Many other invertebrates, vertebrates, and plants live in close association to the scleractinian/dead corals, with tight resource coupling and recycling, allowing coral reefs to have extremely high productivity and biodiversity, such that they are referred to as the Tropical Rainforest of the Oceans” (Odyssey Expeditions, 2001).

Coral reefs support many marine organisms in shallow tropical waters, such as finfish, shellfish and mainly those within the inshore areas and lagoons. Coral reefs are biologically rich ecosystems and provide some of the highest levels of total (gross) productivity on earth (Bryant et al., 1998).

23

Corals and reefs are fragile but are fundamental ecosystems for our Islands and people’s livelihood, “…without reefs many atoll countries and most tourist beaches in the Pacific region would not exist,” (SPREP, 1996).

Corals and reefs provide sanctuaries for marine species, offer science potential medicine, protect coasts and also support economies especially of Pacific Islands for example in the tourism industry. Hinrichsen (1998) explained that nearly a third of all fish species live on coral reefs, reefs, nearby seagrass beds and mangrove swamps for critical stages in their life cycle. Coral reefs also are the most unique features in the Pacific Islands because coral reefs created white sandy beaches and act as wave breakers preventing coastal erosion (World Bank, c.2001).

2.5 COASTAL VEGETATION

Coastal or littoral forest vegetation, including coastal wetlands and mangrove swamps, provide natural protection to coastal areas in the Pacific. The Indo-Pacific distribution of mangrove species follows a pattern with a decline in species from east to west. Pillai (1990) reported 37 mangrove species in Papua New Guinea, 26 in the Solomon Islands and 8 in Fiji (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001) and 3 species were recorded by Whistler (2002) in Samoa.

Mangrove and nearshore ecosystems are significant because they also support the local communities’ subsistence way of life and provide cash income to supplement their daily livelihood. In Fiji the commercial evaluation of mangrove ecosystems showed that mangrove associated fisheries provided subsistence supply of about 8.76 million kg of fish. This amounted to 60% of the total subsistence fisheries with a market price of FJ$17.52 million in 1983 (Maharaj, c.2001).

The mangroves and coastal vegetation protect inland areas from strong winds and waves by acting as wave and windbreakers thus minimizing negative effects of flooding and erosion especially during natural hazards like tsunamis and tropical cyclones. In Samoa in the past, mangroves were more extensive and often fronting and protecting sand beaches. However, their removal for firewood and other purposes may have contributed to coastal erosion (Richmond, 1991).

24

Mangrove communities are nurseries for many marine organisms and other living things, such as small finfish, shellfish, crustaceans, birds and insects, which depend on leaf litter/nutrients for food. Mangrove communities as nurseries have close links with nearshore species. For example, a study in New Caledonia indicated that about 262 species were collected in mangroves and 735 from nearby coral reefs. This illustrates that mangroves are important breeding areas for nearshore marine species (Viles and Spencer, 1995).

The mangrove swamp at Vaiusu Bay in Samoa was a major nursery ground for mullet but this was seriously degraded due to pollution from the former Vaitoloa rubbish Dump along this Bay plus wastes from nearby Vaitele industries. As a result annual mullet catch declined ten-fold in the past five years (Klinkhamers, 1992).

Coastal littoral species are also crucial ecological and cultural resources. As stressed by Thaman (1994) and Whistler (1996) these are perhaps the most wellknown and most useful of the plants available to Pacific Island people.

2.6 IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES AND OTHER MARINE SPECIES

In the Pacific Islands fisheries and marine resources are vital and play a significant role in people’s livelihood. It is stated that the Pacific region/ocean is the largest continuous marine habitat on earth and is the home to incredible marine biodiversity including a wide range of large marine mammals such as whales, dolphins, porpoise, dugongs and marine turtles, (SPREP, 2003).

Fisheries is one of the main sources of protein in Pacific communities especially for low lying Islands and atolls, for example Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu. On atolls for instance, fishing is the primary source of food and accounts for 90% of their protein intake. In Tuvalu and Kiribati each person eats about 575 grams of whole fish daily, which is, nearly twice the 300 grams needed for requirements (Zann, 1983). In large islands like Fiji and Samoa people’s average intake accounts for 246 and 120 grams of fish respectively, because there are other alternative sources of protein available (Zann, 1983).

25

Traditionally the shore, lagoon, reef and a few miles beyond the reef are the main fishing areas for Pacific Island communities. Limited resources and development of cash economies in the Pacific have turned people to fisheries as another income earning commodity. Commercial reef fisheries in French Polynesia supply the main Island of Tahiti, which contains half of the territory’s population. At about 40% of the fish sold in Tahiti markets were from the atolls of the Tuamotu Archipelago (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Fish and other marine species like shellfish, sea cucumbers and a range of other organisms are important for subsistence and commercial uses in many Pacific Islands. A study by FAO (2002) stated in the World Bank (c.2001) identified significant resources in some Pacific Islands (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Important coastal marine species resources at surveyed Islands

Country Important Coastal Resources (descending order of importance)

Fiji Finfish, beche de mer, octopus, seaweed, lobster, mud crab, and various bivalve �molluscs. Tonga Finfish, octopus, lobster, beche de mer, turbo, giant clams, seaweed and anadara. Samoa Finfish (especially surgeonfish, grouper, mullet, carangids, rabbit fish), octopus, giant clams, beche

de mer, turbo, and crab. SolomonIslands

Finfish, beche de mer, trochus, giant clam, lobster, turbo and mangroves

Palau Finfish, giant clams, mangrove crab, lobster, turtle and beche de mer. FAO (2002)

Table 2.1 shows that finfish is the most vital category, particularly species like surgeonfish, grouper, mullet and rabbitfish. In the Melanesian Islands of Fiji and the Solomons, bêche-de-mer is very important for local consumption and export. Other species frequently caught include octopus, giant clams and crabs such as mangrove crabs in Palau and mud crabs in Fiji. Essential small shellfishes include the turbo (Turbo spp.) in Tonga and Samoa and a variety of bivalves in Fiji. Seaweeds and lobsters are also vital in these Islands for sale and consumption.

Commercial fishery products within the Pacific include reef and deep slope fish (43% of total weight), coastal pelagic fish (18%), shell products – trochus, green snail and pearl shell (9%), crustaceans (8%), sea cucumber (7%) and esturine fish (6%) (FAO, 2002). Coastal commercial fisheries compared to subsistence fisheries are smaller and have a restricted range of species

26

although it may still be substantial, for example in Fiji, fish market statistics shows over 100 species of finfish and 50 species of invertebrates (FAO, 2002).

2.6.1 Finfishes

Subsistence and artisanal fishery is often used but much of the inshore catches are not recorded commercially. The inshore receive the enormous impact from human exploitation and according to Adams et al. (c.1998) up to 80% weight of fishery products caught by Pacific Islanders does not enter the cash economy. According to Watson (1984) the estimated annual harvest of finfish is between 11,300 and 17,200 tons, (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Estuarine and mangrove fisheries are important, mostly to Melanesian countries particularly to Papua New Guinea and to a lesser extent Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji, as these countries have larger river systems compared to smaller Islands of Polynesia and Micronesia (Dalzell et al.,1995).

The dominant reef finfish landings in the Pacific include the emperors (Lethrinidae), for example the large catch of Lethrinus nebulosus in New Caledonia and Fiji (Dalzell et al., 1992; Anon, 1994b in Adams et al., 1996). Caillart (1998a) recorded that the Lethrinus miniatus is the main catch in French Polynesia (Dalzell et al., 1995).

The other common species of finfish landings include the surgeonfish (Acanthuridae) like Nasounicornis that is fished throughout the region, Acanthurus dussumieri and N. brevirostris, (Lock 1986a in Dalzell et al., 1995). Lutjanus gibbus, Siganus lineatus are commonly caught on many Islands as well as the Bolbometopon muricatum, Lethrinus ramak, Hipposcarus longiceps andSiganus canaliculatus (Dalzell et al., 1995). Other regular species include the snappers (Lutjanidae), parrotfishes (Scaridae), groupers (Serranidae), goatfishes (Mullidae), jacks, mullet, rabbitfishes and squirrelfishes (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Export of fish takes place from many Islands of the Pacific, for example live reef fish exports from French Polynesia, Cook Islands, Samoa, Kiribati, Solomon Islands and Fiji mainly to Japan and Hong Kong for aquarium trade (Dalzell et al., 1995). Pyle (1993) listed the following families of

27

fish that are important for aquarium trade from the Pacific Islands: the Cirrhitidae, Gobiidae,Balistidae, Beniidae, Pomacentridae, Pomacanthidae, Chaetodontidae, Acanthuridae, Labridaeand Serranidae (Dalzell et al., 1995). In the group Pomacentridae, the most common aquarium export included the damselfishes, Chrysiptera cyanea, Chromis albipectoralis and Dascyllusaruanus from Palau (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Richards 1993 in Adams et al. (1996) stated that reef fish such as coral trout, some groupers and Napoleon wrasse from the Papua New Guinea coast are exported to Hong Kong for the restaurant trade. There was also demand for stonefish Synanceia verrucosa and S. horrida for Asian traditional medicines and consumption (Richards, 1993 in Dalzell et al., 1995). Johannes (1991) noted a similar range of fish exports from Palau to Hong Kong. However, there was closure to this fishery export due to the concern over levels of fishing pressure (Dalzell et al.,1995).

2.6.2 Shellfishes and other Marine Species

Trochus is significant for consumption on Islands and has become economically vital in some Pacific Islands. Many Pacific countries engage in the trochus trade, including Fiji, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Micronesia, Marshall Islands and others. Between 1980 and 1997 New Caledonia and the Solomon Islands were the two major trochus producing countries in the world with an average annual production of 349 and 578 tonnes (Eltayab, 2004).

Trochus and pearl shells are exported for button manufacture and furniture inlay (Adams et al.,1996). In Vanuatu trochus shells is used for making buttons and inlay and has been the single most important commercial marine product for many coastal villages. In the 1980s trochus population were over-harvested and their production declined (Hickey and Johannes, 2004b).

Other vital marine species of commercial value in some Islands include sea cucumbers and sea urchins. Sea cucumbers are harvested and processed into bêche-de-mer (trepang) as commercial species in many Pacific Islands for export mainly to Asian markets. In Fiji, catches of bêche-de-mer reached a peak of approximately 7000 tonnes live weight in 1988 (King, 1995).

28

In 1996 from January to May, the estimated total number of sea cucumbers harvested in Rota Island, Northern Marianas was 103,193 with an estimated total wet weight of 34,242 kg exported mainly to Hong Kong (Trianni, 2002).

Fishers in local markets sell sea urchins, and the sea cucumbers are harvested for the gonads or roe in Samoa whilst the sandfish (Holothuria scabra) is the only eaten species in Fiji (Adams 1992a in Dalzell et al., 1995).

2.7 IMPACTS AFFECTING COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

Natural disasters, the satisfaction of growing community needs and economic developments directly and indirectly destroy coasts and marine biodiversity and leads to a range of coastal issues. These include:

natural hazards

mangrove destruction and degradation

coastal deforestation and de-vegetation

coastal reclamation

waste disposal and pollution

urban and infra-structural developments

sedimentation and runoff

over-exploitation of marine resources

coral reef destruction and marine exploitation

crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) outbreaks

high population density and urbanization

agriculture and farming.

Most of these problems that are major concerns in many Pacific Islands’ coasts and nearshore ecosystems are discussed below. The increasing demand and uncontrollable uses of Pacific Island resources at an accelerating rate will have a negative impact on the coastal and marine resources as well as affecting the local communities. The Earth Summit report 1992 stated that land-based sources contributed to 70% of marine pollution (Quarrie, 1992).

29

Human developments and population growth coupled with natural disasters increase the pressure on coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity. These concerns intensify the vulnerability of island environments to natural catastrophes causing coastal erosion, coral destruction and many other problems that lead to impoverishing government economies and the livelihoods of people.

Loss of native species is another environmental concern for Pacific Islands due to habitat loss, introduced invasive species, over-harvesting and many other factors as a result of many human alterations. According to Zann (2000) local extinction of marine species may have a major impact on the structure of marine communities and functioning of marine ecosystems.

2.7.1 Tropical Cyclones

Natural catastrophes like tropical cyclones cause severe damage in the Pacific region particularly on the southwest Pacific in groups as Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Niue and to a lesser extent towards the eastern Pacific.

In Samoa, Aganoa Bay which contained one of the few ‘coral gardens’ in Samoa, was destroyed by cyclone Ofa in 1990. The rubble left behind after the cyclone was covered with algae for months (Chase and Veitayaki, 1992). Cyclone Ofa in 1990 caused unprecedented damage to property, agriculture, forests and reefs (FAO, 1994) and cyclone Val in 1991 exacerbated these impacts.

The islands of Tahiti further east of the Pacific experienced five cyclones between January and April of 1983 more than in the preceding 150 years. Then sea level rose 4–5 meters with waves 8–10 metres resulting in many villages being flooded to the extent that their water lens became salted. Furthermore, large blocks of corals were torn from the reefs and thrown onto the reef flats (UNESCAP, 2000).

In Pohnpei, Micronesia, a severe cyclone took place in 1997 and massive landslides occurred afterwards due to large-scale clearance of upland forest for commercial kava plantations.

30

Consequently, people were killed and destruction of plantations was severe and so was the damage to coastal and coral reef communities (UNESCAP, 2000).

2.7.2 Global Warming and Coral Bleaching

Mitchell et al. (2003) reported that on a global average sea level has risen about 1–2mm per year but could be much higher in some Pacific Islands by approximately 10 times. For example, in Tonga it has risen about 20 mm per year and 22 mm per year in the Solomon Islands (South etal., 2004).

High sea temperatures and hot climate have serious disastrous effects on marine biodiversity. Increasing sea surface temperatures due to El Niño superimposed on global warming leads to coral stress or coral bleaching, which has resulted in the death of many coral colonies. In French Polynesia during El Niño years of 1982 and 1983 there was major destruction in lagoons and outer slopes caused by six cyclones (Salvat, 2002). The marine scientists symposium held in Australia in 1997 and 1998 reported that coral bleaching episodes of 1997 to 1998 were the most widespread and the most severe in recorded history and as a result marine species dependent on corals for food also suffered (UNESCAP, 2000).

The high sea temperature in 1994 killed over 90% of the living corals of American Samoa from the inter-tidal zone to a depth of 10 metres and as a result fish catches declined due to coral death (UNESCAP, 2000). In Samoa high dead coral cover was caused by coral breakage and bleaching from previous years and the crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) may have been contributed too (Lovell et al., 2004).

Coral bleaching associated with global warming had been a massive killer of corals within the Pacific region. Palau experienced massive bleaching in 1998 when 30% of the reefs were heavily bleached with 75–85% of soft coral mortality and 30–50% of Acropora (Richmond et al.,2002).

31

Salvat (2002) recorded bleaching in Cook Islands in which 80% of Acropora was bleached on Rarotonga in March 2000. In February of the same year, up to 90% of the Goniastrea and Platygyra colonies were bleached in Tonga and Fiji (Salvat, 2002).

In 2000 Fiji suffered massive coral bleaching: Cumming et al. (2002) reported that 64% of all scleractinian corals at the surveyed sites were either partially or fully bleached at all areas except those on the far north of Vanua Levu Island. About 80% of colonies at southern sites were bleached, (South et al., 2004). In Samoa bleaching of shallow water corals reported by Skelton (unpublished) from the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve was caused by extreme low tides (South etal., 2004).

2.7.3 Coastal Deforestation and De-vegetation

People alter coastal ecosystems to suit their lifestyles. In mangroves, wetlands and other coastal ecosystems habitat destruction leads to the loss and decline of particular living things such as birds, snails, insects and other organisms as well as the decline of nearshore marine biodiversity.

The biodiversity of the Pacific Islands started to decline when the first humans settled these Islands. For example, the Polynesian settlers in the Marquesas exterminated 8 of the 20 species of sea birds including shearwaters, petrels and boobies. In addition 14 of 16 land birds, mainly the flightless rails, pigeons, doves, parrots and songbirds, became extinct (UNESCAP, 2000).

Globally, even though there is no exact total calculation of how much mangrove area has been lost, Kelleher et al. (1995) estimated that 50% of the world’s mangrove forests have been lost (Burke et al. 2001). According to MacKinnon (1997) Papua New Guinea lost 8% of its mangrove area from 1992 to 1993 (Burke et al. 2001), a rapid and huge loss for such a small period of time.

In Fiji up to 40% of mangrove forests have been destroyed or reclaimed in the past 30 to 40 years which is high, for example destruction and land filling of large mangrove swamps adjacent Lami Dump for container storage (South et al., 2004).

32

Reclamation is another critical problem of coastal areas within the Pacific Islands due to the high number of people settling along the coast. Mangroves were common around the Suva area but due to urban expansion along the coastline such as the Suva harbour, only a few embayments of mangroves remain (SPREP, 1994b). Lal (1984) stated that by 1980 reclamation for sugarcane and some for rice cultivation accounted for over 74% of reclamation in Fiji.

Due to high degradation of littoral vegetation, shorelines, coastal and nearshore biodiversity were exposed and subjected to strong winds and waves resulting in coastal erosion. Loss or removal of mangroves and other coastal plants leads to habitat loss for many living organisms as well as causing decreases in marine food production. Large-scale deforestation contributed to the exploitation of nearshore shellfish beds and coral reefs in the Solomon Islands (Hinrichsen, 1998).

The Solomon Island mangroves are under great threat from logging, mining and reclamation for human settlement, waste disposal and over-exploitation by traditional users (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001). Cutting of coastal vegetation and mangroves are common in the Pacific Islands not only for settlement, development and landfills but also for firewood. Mangroves have been logged and used as firewood by commercial suppliers at Auki in Malaita as well as being felled by villagers for traditional use near Langa Langa Lagoon south of Auki (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001) thus increasing sedimentation that smothers corals and reefs.

2.7.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution

Although waste disposal in highly industrialized countries still far surpasses that of the Pacific countries, the level of disposal is an issue due to the small sizes and the fragile ecosystems of Islands. Waste disposal and problems like domestic wastes (consisting of sewage, rubbish and industrial effluents) contributed to the increase of coastal pollution. Imported products have increased litter including plastics and other non-degradable materials commonly used in the Pacific Islands nowadays (Table 2.2).

33

Table 2.2: Waste disposal figures for selected Pacific Island countries Country Population Average Waste

Generation rate (kg/capita/day) Biodegradable content (%)

Cook Islands (Rarotonga) 19600 0.19 35FSM (Pohnpei) 134000 0.38 19Fiji (Lautoka) 825000 0.92 68Kiribati (South Tarawa) 76000 0.33 20Marshall Islands (Majuro) 51000 0.38 46Papua New Guinea 4400000 0.41 62Samoa (Apia) 170000 1.05

0.526159

Solomon Islands (Honiara) 385000 0.220.38

6520

Tonga (Nuku’alofa) 97000 0.820.68

4762

Tuvalu (Funafuti) 10000 0.43 52Vanuatu (Port Vila) 175000 0.65 71Average 0.55 49Notes: collated from studies carried out, 1996 – 1999, by various organizations at bracketed cities. Source: JICA (2001) in Thaman et al. (2003)

Table 2.2 illustrates high average waste in the urban centres of Apia (Samoa), Lautoka (Fiji), Nuku’alofa (Tonga) and Port Vila (Vanuatu). As reported by Thaman et al. (2003), comparison of the results of a study conducted between 1990 and 1994 with a SPREP study in 1999 shows that generation rates of waste in small Pacific Island developing states have increased from about 0.42 kg/capita/day to about 0.66 kg/capita/day.

Similarly, studies by Crennan and Bery (2002) shows a 57% increase in waste generation within nine years and this attribute mainly to the increase of paper and plastic products especially disposable nappies and plastics (Thaman et al., 2003).

Plastics discarded carelessly by people and washed down by rivers and brought in by the sea pollute beaches and affect marine mammals and other organisms. For example, the ingestion of plastic bags can kill cetaceans and turtles (SPREP, 2003).

Sewage, domestic waste and importation of canned and wrapped products create rubbish that generates problems on Islands that can not afford recycling plants. Most Islands depend on landfills and Dumps, which are commonly located in and contribute to the degradation of coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity. Erakor lagoon in Vanuatu receives high nutrients from the

34

urban sewage in Vila, which causes the frequent occurrence of phytoplankton bloom due to the long lagoonal water residence times (Brodie et al. 1990).

There have also been cases of infectious disease outbreaks due to the contamination of shellfishand other marine organisms by sewage waste. For example, in Kiribati cholera broke out in 1977–1978 and caused the death of 21 people as a result of water pollution and contamination of shellfish (Maung 1979 in Brodie et al. 1990). Johannes et al. (1979), recorded that a study of Tarawa’s lagoon and shellfish quality showed widespread contamination. As a result of this study a sewage system was installed for Betio in which waste is now discharged into the open ocean instead of the lagoon (Brodie et al. 1990). Cholera has also been a problem in Truk in the Federated States of Micronesia for some time (Brodie et al. 1990).

People see mangrove communities as unattractive wasteland swamps that are muddy, murky and waterlogged, with a foul smell. Because of these perceptions and lack of knowledge, people use mangroves and swamps as dumping sites, source of firewood, reclaimed land for settlement and many other activities that exploit these particular areas and organisms living there. In Koror State, Palau, a landfill located adjacent to a mangrove forest caused pollution due to landfill leachate that contaminated the marine ecosystem and water resources of surrounding areas (Maiava and Otobed, 1994).

Mangroves in or near urban areas are also commonly used as dumping sites thus causing serious problems in terms of the decline and destruction of mangrove communities and nearshore ecosystems. Water in Suva harbour is toxic from untreated domestic and industrial effluents (Hinrichsen, 1998).

Other developments such as industrial wastes or chemicals drained to nearshore areas also put pressure on these fragile ecosystems. In 1979, a buried pipeline transporting marine diesel oil in Apra, Guam, leaked about 10,000 gallons of oil into the mangrove community and over 13,000 mangroves and a range of other marine organisms died (Brodie and Morrison, 1984).

35

In many Pacific Islands industrial wastewater commonly drains onto the coast and inshore marine areas. Cripps (1992) reported that wastewater from the Lautoka sugar mill was high in biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids and oil. According to SPC et al. (1984), effluent from the Labasa sugar mill resulted in repeated incidents of fish kills in the Labasa River (Thaman etal., 2003).

Pollution of the sea by many terrestrial developments and disposal of waste pose threats to nearshore resources. Zann (1994) noted the problem of heavy metal pollution in urban centres like Pago Pago, American Samoa, where industrial wastewater contained high levels of arsenic, chromium, copper, nickel, mercury, zinc and lead.

Naidu and Morrison (1994) recorded that shellfish and sediments of Suva harbour area were severely contaminated with mercury, lead and copper (Thaman et al., 2003). Also, traces of metals were found in contaminated sediments and shellfish in Suva (South et al., 2004). Tamata et al. (1993) reported that increasing levels of tributyltin (TBT) caused imposex in female neogastropods around the Suva area (South et al., 2004).

2.7.5 Mining

Sandy beaches need to maintain their equilibrium with wave action as beaches can be easily changed by influences such as ocean/sea variations or natural hazards like tidal waves and cyclones. Human interference with coastal ecosystems can upset this equilibrium by building unplanned seawalls, sand mining and cutting of coastal plants. In Kiribati and French Polynesia even though coral and sand mining was banned it still continued and resulted to the disappearance of beaches near urban areas (Salvat, 2002).

In the Pacific mineral resources are limited but people depend on the coastal ecosystems for food, household necessities, settlement and infra-structural development resulting in exploitation of coastal resources (Table 2.3).

36

Table 2.3: Exploitation of coastal materials in Pacific Island countries

Country Coastal mineral potential

Is coastal mineral extraction a problem?

Are there alternative sources of materials?

Is coastal stability a critical issue?

Cook Islands * *** Yes ***FSM * ** Yes **Fiji *** * Yes **Kiribati --- *** No ***Marshall Islands --- ** No ***Niue * * No ***Palau --- * --- **Samoa * *** Yes **Solomon Islands *** ** Yes ***Tonga * *** Yes **Tuvalu --- *** No ***Vanuatu ** ** Yes ***--- Not available * Low ** Medium *** High Source: Howard (1997) in World Bank (c.2001)

Table 2.3 summarises the exploitation levels of coastal materials in some Pacific Islands. High Islands like Solomon Islands, Fiji and Vanuatu have high potential and alternative sources of coastal minerals. The level of exploitation of these resources is not so dramatic in these large high Islands compared to low-lying and small islands.

Table 2.3 shows that small Islands like Samoa, Tonga and Cook Islands have low coastal mineral potential but extraction of coastal resources is high. The problem is similar in the smaller low-lying atolls of Marshal Islands, Tuvalu and Kiribati with medium to high levels of exploitation. These Islands – Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Palau and Kiribati – have no other alternative resources of such materials. The underlying factor is that all of these Pacific Islands, whether high or low, are facing coastal instability. There is thus great need to address human activities and natural disasters concerning problems with coastal stability, especially in light of the potential negative impacts of global warming and sea level rise (Howard, 1997 in World Bank, c.2001).

Globally, dredging caused 80-90% of all material dumped at sea including liquid, suspended particles and solid materials that may affect benthic organisms by smothering and destroying habitat (GESAMP, 1990). Dredging stirs up contaminated materials and re-introduces disposal problems or changes the water circulation pattern.

37

Chemical pollutants like petroleum or diesel tainted and increased contamination of finfish, shellfish and other marine organisms (GESAMP, 1990). In Kolonia, Pohnpei and Kosrae, dredging and interruption of tidal flow by infra-structure projects have led to silting of harbours, reefs and mangrove swamps (SPREP, 1996).

Dredging and sand mining are problems for sandy beaches which lead also to the loss of marine organisms. In Fiji sand mining was carried out from a back reef area of the lagoon in Laucala Bay for cement production and it was suggested that this contributed to heavy mortality of turtle grass (Syringodium isoetifolium) and fish declines due to direct loss of this seagrass (Lal, 1984). In Solomon Islands, as a result of a prograding of a section of the coastline adjacent to the western side of the Lungga River Delta, Ranadi beach in Honiara has been experiencing erosion for many years (Gillie, 1992).

These problems worsened if sand mining is not sustainable, although in some islands it has grown to a large-scale or commercial activity. Tappin (1993) and Howorth (1997) noted that beach sand in Tonga has been removed at rates 2 – 5 times higher than the natural regeneration rate (World Bank, c.2001).

Howorth (1997) also reported that in the mid-1990s the annual extraction of sand – a key cement ingredient – averaged 15,000 cubic metres in Tongatapu and 70,000 cubic metres in Suva, Fiji (World Bank, c.2001). In Samoa, apart from large-scale sand mining in Apia there has been periodic mining of beach and beach ridge deposits near Salamumu and Lefaga; flood delta deposits at the Vaisigano River mouth in Apia; and the spit at the mouth of Tuafaleloa Stream near Solosolo Village (Richmond, 1991).

Mining for minerals is not a huge issue for the smaller Pacific Islands compared to countries with rich mineral deposits, although problems of mine tailings have caused great concern in Papua New Guinea and to a lesser extent New Caledonia and Fiji (Brodie et al. 1990).

The mine tailings from the Panguna mine in Bougainville, for example, used to discharge high levels of copper in the sediment of the Jaba River and in the 1980s the Jaba River was dead with

38

a decline of fish in its tributaries (Brodie et al., 1990). Before the Bougainville mine was closed in the early 1990s, about 135, 000 metric tonnes of mine tailings had been dumped into the Jaba River daily (Hinrichsen, 1998).

Land clearance and disposal of wastes near or in rivers contributed to negative impacts on the coast and nearshore marine. Mowbray (1986b) recorded that in June 1984 free cyanide was being released into the Ok Tedi River in Papua New Guinea and caused a large fish and prawn kill at the area as well as disrupting the life of local people (Brodie et al., 1990).

Most contaminants are from inland activities such as logging, mining and agriculture using pesticides and many other pollutants. The expanding Emperor gold mine in Vatukoula, Fiji, raised serious concerns as evidence of cyanide pollution has been detected in streams and water resources of the area (Thaman et al., 2003). As stated by Manner et al. (1984, 1985) and Thaman and Hassal (2000) the problem of cadmium pollution is associated with the processing of phosphate rock during mining operations in Nauru (Thaman et al., 2003).

2.7.6 Infra-structural Impacts

Manufacturing, dams, roads and other infrastructure and services assist Island countrieseconomically. However, these developments have great impacts on coastal and nearshore areas, posing danger to these ecosystems. Techniques for coastal protection are intended as means to minimize sand erosion but the designs used ended up washing away beaches. In New Caledonia, Benezit (1981) stated that construction work on the extension of an artificial shoreline at Noumea harbour resulted in effluent from the processing plant filling the nearby mangroves and estuarine areas (Brodie et al. 1990).

In Kiribati, erosion in the early 1980s was quite dramatic along the beachfront immediately east of Bairiki harbour. According to Howorth (1983) in July 1982 the sand lost from this area had been supplementing beaches on the east, and even coconut trees at the beachhead disappeared (it is not clear where or how they disappeared). In place, loose coral boulders were used as a seawall but in two weeks time this was lost. People then constructed a gabion basket seawall (Howorth, 1983).

39

In American Samoa development activities on the foreshore and backshore caused shoreline erosion. These activities include boat channel paths being bulldozed across reef flats. Severe erosion occurred mainly from reef flats in areas like Fagasau Bay, Ava Point and Alofau in American Samoa (SPREP, 1994b). In Samoa the 65 hectares of Vaiusu mangrove wetlands were partially cleared for the main road and used for the former rubbish Dump at Vaitoloa (Klinckhamers, 1992).

Lal (1984) noted that the building of the coastal road led to sedimentation of adjacent fringing coral reefs in Fiji (Brodie et al., 1990). The building of the Pacific Harbour Resort on Viti Levu in Fiji led to heavy input of sediment into estuaries in the 1970s and resulted to the killing of many coral colonies around the mouth of the Qaraniqio River (Lal, 1984).

A road project in the early 1990s on the southern shores of Guam caused heavy sedimentation that affected a 10 km section of fringing reefs killing all the corals (Richmond et al., 2002). Also in Guam, the main power generation facilities are located on Cabras Island near Apra Harbor north of the main town, where discharge water, which also contained cleaning chemicals to cool generators killed corals in the process (Richmond et al., 2002).

2.7.7 Sedimentation and other Streams/Rivers Link Problems with Coasts

Streams link terrestrial activities with the coast and nearshore marine area by sedimentation andthe transportation of materials to the coast. Rivers and streams have great impacts on the coastal areas because these provide a connection and conduit for land-based materials with the ocean and marine life. A study by The University of the South Pacific showed that average faecal coliform concentrations of most Suva creeks greatly exceed international standards (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Poisons, chemicals and land-based wastes washed down by rivers also caused the smothering of corals and reefs, killing other marine life. Occasionally fish caught off Suva harbour have an oily and kerosene flavour and also marine organisms found in the harbour have been degraded (UNESCAP, 2003b).

40

Consequently, people around Suva were advised not to consume local shellfish from surrounding areas due to the danger of hepatitis because of contamination and sewage waste absorbed by shellfish. However, the local low-income residents still use areas like Laucala Bay as a source of food (UNESCAP, 2003b).

Sediment runoff caused by land clearance and logging is a major hazard for coral growth. However, unsustainable logging with authorization from governments in Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands had been carried out and licences have been granted to harvest up to 97% of the existing rainforests in Solomon Islands (UNESCAP, 2000). Consequently loss of biodiversity occurs among animals and forest species, and in addition sedimentation smothers corals and other organisms of coastal and nearshore ecosystems.

Deforestation and upland activities increase sedimentation and pollution that destroy the inshore marine and species. For example, logging in the upper Navua river catchment in Fiji has resulted in silting up of important parts of the Upper Navua River Gorge, a Fiji designated site under the Ramsar Wetland Convention (Thaman et al., 2003). In Tonga due to the growth of butter pumpkin production for export over the past years in Tongatapu, the amount of fertilizer leachate has increased and polluted the freshwater lens of the Island (Thaman et al., 2003).

In Samoa poor agricultural practices near watershed uplands of the Vaisigano River has led to the shoaling of the Apia harbour by 1.7 metres between 1975 and 1981 and death of the reef adjacent to the river mouth (Klinckhamers, 1992). Clearing of forests and burning of grassland in New Caledonia for grazing and agriculture increased erosion and subsequent sedimentation at nearshore areas (Iltis 1979 in Brodie et al. 1990).

2.8 IMPACTS ON NEARSHORE MARINE AND FISHERIES

The inshore area is the most important fishing ground for Pacific communities. Subsistence and artisanal fisheries are significant but much of the inshore catches are not recorded commercially. The inshore areas receive enormous impact from human exploitation and according to Adams etal. (c.1998) up to 80% weight of fishery products caught by Pacific Islanders do not enter the cash economy.

41

Inshore finfish and other seafood have been exploited due to high local fresh fish demand for particular species by foreign markets especially into Asia. The Napoleon or Maori wrasse has been over-fished due to consumption and high commercial value, which highligted a need for controlling its commercial exportation (Sadovy, 2005).

In Fiji, Lal (1983) and Fong (1994) recorded that over-fishing by commercial fishers in urban centres could have been the cause for the decline in mullet landings (Vuki et al., 2000). Fong (1994) also noted the decline in mullet that had been experienced by Sasa villagers in Macuata on Vanua Levu Island (Vuki et al., 2000).

Other commercial marine products currently exploited in the Pacific include trochus (Trochusniloticus), green snail (Turbo marmoratus), black-lip pearl oyster (Pinctada margaritifera), giant clam (Tridacna spp.), eteline snapper and large serranids (Adams and Majkowski 1997 in FAO, 2002).

2.8.1 Over-harvesting and Exploited Species

There are numerous reports of the declines of main species in the Pacific Islands: examples include the reef and lagoon stocks in Palau, noted by Johannes (1981, 1991); reef and lagoon fish in Kiribati, recorded by Yeeting and Wright (1989); bonefish, milkfish and parrotfish in the Cook Islands, (Anon 1988a and Dashwood SPC Fisheries Programme pers. comm.); various grouper stocks in French Polynesia, (Bell, 1980); reef and small pelagic fishes in Samoa (Helm, 1992) and Tokelau (Hooper, 1985 in Dalzell et al., 1995).

Myers (1989) and Hensley and Sherwood (1993) noted that in Guam and Palau the commercial spear-fishers have driven certain reef species like the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometaponmucicatum) and the Napoleon wrasse (Chelinus undulatus) to very low population levels (Dalzell et al., 1995). Kitalong and Dalzell (1994) reported excessive fishing pressure in Palau resulting in the decline of certain fish species such as mullet (Crenimugil crenilabis).

Hensley and Sherwood (1993) analysis of catches between 1982 and 1991 showed large declines of particular species in Guam such as goatfish (Mulloidichthys flavolineatus), parrotfish

42

(Bolbometopon muricatum), wrasse (Chilinus undulatus) and large snappers and groupers (Dalzell et al., 1995).

In Fiji emperor species (Lethrinus) and mullet (Muligidae) have been over-fished and the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometopon) was fished to local extinction in most areas (Sulu et al.,2002). King (1979) also stated that mullet declined dramatically in the Lau Islands of Fulanga and Ono-i-lau in Fiji (Wenzel, 1989).

Important species like turtles, giant clams even marine mammals like whales are increasingly rare or threatened in the Pacific region. These species are significant to many Pacific cultures, like the importance of the whale and dolphin teeth in Fiji and Solomon Islands. Over-fishing of turtles had been experienced throughout the Pacific region. In 1993 Solomon Islands banned the export of turtle shells as well as imposing a closure in harvesting seasons for all turtle species and eggs during nesting seasons of June – August and November – January, (Sulu et al., 2000).

Giant clams had been over-harvested in many Pacific Islands and the export of giant clams was banned in Fiji in 1989 when it was nearly exploited (Wenzel 1989). On many reefs in Fiji the species Tridacna derasa and Tridacna squamosa clams have been over-fished and currently the fishers are targeting the Tridacna maxima, which has been over-harvested in many parts of Fiji (Vuki et al., 2000). The Tridacna gigas and Hippopus hippopus became extinct, (Vuki et al.,2000).

In Solomon Islands commercial development of giant clams was important in the 1970s and 1980s (Sulu et al., 2000). In 1983 Solomon Islands exported about 10.2 tons of adductor meat while the rest of the animal was usually wasted. As a result giant clam exports declined to just 60 kg in 1986. This shows how heavily the stock has been exploited (Sulu et al., 2000).

Shells are valuable, for example turtle shells and the black-lipped pearl that are commercially essential for making handicrafts for the growing tourism industry. Pearl oysters are vital in some Islands, for example the commercially significant species of pearl oysters in Solomon Islands like the blacklip oysters (Pinctada margaritifera), goldlip (P.maxima) and the brownlip (Pteria penguin)

43

(Sulu et al., 2000). The blacklip oyster reached its peak in 1991 when it made up almost 70% of the export (Sulu et al., 2000).

Apart from finfish and shellfish, other marine organisms had been exploited in many Pacific Islands. The black coral used in the jewellery industry has been over-harvested in Tonga (Wenzel, 1989).

Pearl oyster, green snail and grouper have been fished beyond their capability for short-term recovery (Adams and Majkowski, 1997 in FAO, 2002). In Fiji, the collection of many common shells for sale has caused the depletion of the giant triton shell (Charonia tritonis) (Vuki et al.,2000).

Over-harvesting of invertebrates and particular gastropods created crises in many places due to declining exports and their significance for shell value in the ornamental shell trade. These are usually the cowrie species, cones, helmets, volutes, conches and spider shells (King 1995). In Fiji gastropods are gathered to earn money and also the top shell Trochus niloticus has been exported to Asian and European markets (Parkinson 1982 in FAO 2002).

Bêche-de-mer, because of its shallow-water habitat, high export demand and prices has been subjected to rapid commercial exploitation in many Islands. The high wholesale price of the first-grade well prepared sandfish, Holothuria sabra, increase the pressure for over-harvesting of this product (Purcell et al. 2002). Bêche-de-mer has been reported as being over-fished in various islands; for example in 1998 sandfish was nearly extirpated in Togak region in Papua New Guinea (Lokani, 1990 in Uthicke and Conand, 2005).

In the Northern Marianas the sea cucumbers, surf redfish (Actinopyga mauritiana) and the black teatfish (Holothuria whitmaei) were the target products of a commercial company before it moved to Saipan, as sea cucumbers on some areas of Rota Island were over-harvested (Trianni 2002). Richmond (1995) estimated that over 30,000,000 sea cucumbers were harvested during those years, and suggested that areas around Chuuk have yet to recover from the high exploitation rates of the 1920s and 1930s (Trianni, 2002).

44

The black teatfish (Holothuria nobilis), white teatfish (H. fuscogilva) and blackfish (Actinopygamiliaris) were the main exported species from the Solomon Islands in the 1960s and 1970s (Sulu et al., 2000). The collection of sea cucumbers as a commercial commodity reached its peak in 1992 with 175 metric tonne and the trend declined within a decade (Sulu et al., 2000).

2.8.2 Fishing Methods

In many Pacific societies males are mainly involved in fishing for finfish using various methods and canoes, while women participate mainly in reef gleaning and gathering of marine invertebrates and other seafood.

Some factors that have contributed to over-exploitation of lagoons and nearshore marine resources are the increasing efficient fishing methods used due to high demand for fresh fish and commercial uses. Veitayaki (1995) noted that gill nets contributed to the over-exploitation of fish in many parts of Fiji (South et al., 2004). Modern advanced and efficient methods of fishing include various fishing nets, spearing, night diving, use of SCUBA gear and other means that increase pressure on fish resources leading to the decline or over-exploitation of fish and other marine species.

Spear fishing and SCUBA gears were associated with the extinction of Bolbometopon muricatumand Cheilinus undulatus in Guam and large-scale declines of these species in Palau (Dalzell etal., 1995). According to Vuki et al. (2000) the introduction of underwater breathing apparatus and lucrative prices by overseas buyers are the major causes for the over-exploitation of shellfish in Fiji.

Fish corrals set on the reef flat around the Island of Tongatapu in Tonga were made to catch mullet for commercial uses and due to the success of this method the stocks declined (Dalzell etal., 1995). Inner reef fisheries were recorded as fully exploited throughout Tonga due to over-fishing and efficient methods of fishing, which resulted in the decline of mullet and other finfish species thus leading to the ban on commercial fishing in Fanga’uta lagoon between 1975 and 1981. This ban was difficult to maintain and was lifted in 1981 due to pressure from local fishers (Wenzel, 1989).

45

Development projects like loans granted for fishing boats and fishing gear encourage fishers to over-fish stocks using destructive fishing techniques to meet payments (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Destructive fishing methods such as explosives/dynamites, poisons and other efficient techniques used to increase catches are illegal as they exploit finfish and other marine organisms. Dynamite blasting was used to catch short mackerel (Rastrelliger brachysoma) to sell or use as bait in Fiji (South et al., 2004). Destructive fishing with poisons and dynamite has been reported in Tonga, Kiribati and Wallis and Futuna (Salvat, 2002).

Many fishers in the Pacific used to practice the use of toxic plants to poison marine species especially finfish (Table 2.4).

Table 2.4: Plants used as poisons in the Pacific region Scientific name Parts used Description/notes Areas used Barringtonia asiaticaB.speciosa

Seed Tree: active compound is saponin A.Samoa, Fiji, Futuna, French Polynesia, Guam,Vanuatu

Derris elliptica Root, bark,Stems

High-climbing woody liana. Roots contain rotenoids, the most potent of which are rotenone and tephrosin. It was introduced from Asia to the Pacific and is commonly cultivated for rotenone production

A.Samoa, Fiji, Kosrae, New Caledonia, Guam, PNG, Palau, Vanuatu, Samoa

Euphorbia cotinifoliaE.canadensis, E.tannensis

Stems,leaves

Fiji, New Caledonia

Neubergia collina Fruit Steamed fruit is mixed with water Fiji Pittosporum arborenscens Fruit Cooked first Fiji, Tonga Tephrosia piscatorial Leaves Perennial herb Cook Islands, Hawaii, Fiji,

Tahiti, Moorea Source: GIWA Taskteam (2004) in South et al., 2004

Table 2.4 illustrates the main plant poisons used in many villages for fishing. These include the Derris elliptica and Barringtonia asiatica commonly use in American Samoa, Samoa, Fiji, Guam and Vanuatu. Others like the Euphorbia spp., were used in Fiji and New Caledonia and the Tephrosia piscatorial was also used in Fiji as well as the Cook Islands, French Polynesia and Hawaii.

46

Modern destructive chemicals used were the chlorine (often houshehold bleach) and cyanide. Cyanide damage corals and Jones and Steven (1997) stated that high concentration of cyanide kills coral outright (South et al., 2004).

2.9 VULNERABILITY AND THREATS TO CORALS AND REEFS

Corals and reef growth are vulnerable to natural and human actions. Bryant et al. (1998) reported that 36% of global coral reefs are threatened by over-exploitation, 30% by coastal development, 22% by inland pollution and erosion and 12% by marine pollution. Corals are degraded due to physical breakage during fishing and reef gleaning activities in almost all shallow water lagoons. Corals are also accidentally damaged by people walking on them and others have been deliberately taken and broken to remove fish and invertebrates (UNESCAP, 2003a). Fish stocks could recover quickly after being over-fished but corals grow slowly and takes a long time to recover.

Corals are destroyed by commercial sand mining or by other various uses in some Pacific Islands. McCue (2005) mentioned that in the Pacific marine carbonate is mined from back-reefs, lagoons and reef crests usually in water less than 10 metres deep. Montastrea spp. and Poritesspp. are commonly mined as well as Acropora spp. that are usually attached to fine abraded gravel and sand from shallow lagoons (McCue, 2005). Mining of the living coral (Acropora spp.)is a problem in Melanesian countries like the Solomon Islands and particularly in Papua New Guinea, which use this coral type for production of lime used to chew with betel nut (Brown, 1986).

Agriculture and other activities also contribute to coral destruction. For example, it was suggested that the use of pesticides caused the outbreak of the crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci). This outbreak was experienced by many Pacific Islands as it killed large areas of coral in American Samoa and Samoa as well as in the Cook Islands (Wenzel, 1989).

Destructive fishing, tourism activities, boat anchors and sedimentation are just a few impacts that people have on corals and reefs. Sedimentation smothers corals and is a fundamental problem

47

that needs to be addresed especially with development. Damage to corals was also caused by siltation from shoreline developments at Nuku’alofa harbour (Wenzel, 1989).

Terry and Thaman (2001) reported extensive mortality of coral reefs and disappearance of associated marine organisms near the Shangri-La Fijian Resort in Fiji. This was a result of coastal and inland deforestation, indiscriminate burning and the adoption of crops like cassava in sequential planting mainly on very steep land that accelerated erosion (Thaman et al., 2003).

2.10 MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

In the Pacific Islands, traditional management of resources in communities used to be the basis for land and marine resource use. Village communities in the Pacific have traditional ways to manage their coastal and nearshore marine resources, for example the wide use of moratoria or tabu.

In Fiji a tabu is imposed after a death of a chief to build up resources to enable a large commemorative feast after 100 days (Adams et al., c.1998) while in Solomon Islands an individual reef owner can declare this in order to build up enough trochus shell stock for occasional commercial harvest (Foale 1996 in Adams et al., c.1998).

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) programmes are currently being used in the Pacific to assist the local communities to sustain their marine resources. The coral garden project in Fiji for the Cuvu Tikina covers eight villages with the Shangri-La’s Fijian Resort. This project has an important component of educating and training local people in restoring reef and mainly setting aside 20% of the reef area as tabu to replenish fish and marine stocks (AFAP Report, 2001).

Community based giant clam reserves initiated in 1988 in Vava’u Island in Tonga increased settlement of endangered species of giant clams for surrounding reefs (UNESCAP, 2000). In association with the Tongan Ministry of Fisheries the community based giant clam reserves spread to other islands of Tonga (UNESCAP, 2000).

48

2.11 PACIFIC REGIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

There are established legislations, regulations and assistance within the Pacific region to help local communities to manage their coastal and nearshore marine resources. Government departments, regional organizations like the Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC), Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) provide management advice and carry out programmes to sustain resources (UNESCAP, 2000). Also governments, regional organizations and non-governmental organizations assist local communities in securing financial help to manage their resources.

The management of fisheries resources in the Pacific is protected under the Law of the Sea Convention 1982. The FFA assist countries to manage the highly migratory living fisheries and resources of the Pacific Islands Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), for example tuna, whales, some oceanic sharks, crayfish and turtles. The FFA is the leading agency in facilitating fishing negotiations between its 16 member countries and distant water fishing nations (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The SPC in Noumea, New Caledonia, encouraged and bolstered international cooperation to assist the local communities in the Pacific region. The SPC facilitates measures of development in providing educational, technical and scientific research to improve economic and social welfare of Pacific Islanders mainly in managing marine resources (Adams et al., c.1998). The now independent South Pacific Geosciences Commission (SOPAC, formerly CCOP-SOPAC) based in Suva, Fiji, provides technical and scientific research in aid of Pacific Islands to derive benefits by utilizing marine resources within their 200-mile EEZs (UNESCAP, 2000).

The SPREP based in Apia, Samoa focuses specifically on policy development and public education to implement conservation management of the Pacific environment (UNESCAP, 2000). All these organizations collaborate with other international organizations such as the UNESCAP, FAO and others together with Island countries and local communities as well as donors in developing sustainable means to conserve biodiversity of Islands.

49

CHAPTER THREE SAMOA: BACKGROUND, COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY AND ASSOCIATED

PROBLEMS

3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER

Chapter three consists of two main parts. First, it covers basic background information on Samoa and the current situation in relation to its environment and development. Secondly, on the basis of a review of existing literature, it discusses the effects of natural and human impacts on Samoa’s coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

3.2 LOCATION AND POLITICAL HISTORY OF INDEPENDENT SAMOA

Samoa, a volcanic archipelago in the South Pacific, lies between 13 and 15º South latitude and 168º and 173º West longitude (Whistler, 2002). In geographical terms Samoa refers to the volcanic chain of Islands that is divided politically, with the eastern Samoa Islands of Tutuila and Manu’a known as American Samoa, a territory of the United States of America (USA) and the western Islands of Independent Samoa (Figure 3.1).

Western Samoa was colonized by Germany from 1900 to 1914 and was taken over and administered by New Zealand on behalf of the League of Nations from 1914 to 1961 until it became the first colonized Island country in the Pacific to become independent in 1962 (Va’a, 2001). Its name was changed from Western Samoa to ‘Samoa’ in 1997.

The independent country of Samoa is composed of two large Islands and seven smaller ones of which four are inhabited. The two main islands are Savai’i, the largest island with an area of 1700 sq km, and the Island of Upolu with an area of 1,115 sq km (SPREP, 1994a) where the capital Apia is located and the focus of this research. The two smaller inhabited Islands of Manono and Apolima are located in the 64km wide strait between Savai’i and Upolu. The smaller uninhabited islands include Nu’utele, Nu’ulua, Nu’ulopa and Namu’a, which are all located off the southeast coast of Upolu Island (Whistler, 2002).

50

Figure 3.1: Map of the South Pacific Islands showing the location of Samoa, the research country

Source: adapted from http://www.spc.org.nc/mdgs/INDEX.htm

3.3 GEOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY

The total land area of Independent Samoa is approximately 2,820 sq. km and its topography is mainly mountainous and rugged in the interior and flat around the coast. The highest elevation in Savai’i is Mt. Silisili at 1,858 metres and Upolu’s highest elevation is Mt. Fito at 1158m (SPREP, 1994a).

The Islands of Samoa as stated by Keating (1992) were sequentially formed during the Pliocene in an easterly direction by a series of ‘hot spot’ eruptions (Whistler, 2002). According to Kear and Woods (1959) the geological structure of Samoa was formed by six distinct volcanic episodes each producing extensive lava flows that ran seaward from high volcanic cones. These volcanic episodes from oldest to the youngest (Fagaloa, Salani, Mulifanua, Lefaga, Pu’apu’a and Aopo volcanics) produced distinctive land-slopes between the volcano and the coast, and the types of

51

coastline that provides the three basic coastal types on the Islands, (Richmond 1992 in Kay, 1993). These coastal types will be explained in detail later in 3.9.

3.4 CLIMATE

Samoa has a tropical oceanic climate with the wet season from November to April and the dry season from May to October (SPREP, 1994a). Rainfall ranges from 2,500mm on the north and western leeward sides of the main islands, to over 6,000mm in the highlands of Savaii (SPREP, 1994a). About 75% of precipitation occurs during the warm/wet period particularly from November to January and cyclones usually occur in December to February (Taulealo, 1993). Predominant southeasterly trade winds in the wet season cause high rainfall in eastern Upolu whilst rainshadow areas include western Upolu and eastern and northern Savai’i (SPREP, 1994a).

It is generally hot and humid and the average annual temperature of 26.5 C is experienced by

coastal areas up to 32ºC nowadays. Humidity is usually high, with an average relative humidity of 83% in Apia (SPREP, 1994a). The wet and warm season is the most uncomfortable time due to high humidity averaging about 80% with more rainfall and greater temperatures (Whistler, 2002).

3.5 FLORA

Whistler (2002) categorized the vegetation of Samoa into six different communities:

Littoral vegetation

wetland vegetation (marshes, mangroves, freshwater swamps)

rainforest (lowland, montane and cloud forest)

upland scrub (summit scrub and montane scrub)

volcanic vegetation and

disturbed vegetation (managed land; successional; secondary forest and fernlands).

52

Samoa’s flora is composed of approximately 550 species of angiosperms/flowering plants. At the species level 30% of flowering plants in Samoa are endemic and only one single genus, Sarcopygme of the Rubiaceae family, is endemic to the Samoan archipelago (Whistler 1992, 2002). Of the 550 indigenous species there are approximately 215 ferns with 13 fern allies and about 15% of ferns in Samoa are endemic (Whistler 1984b, 2001 and 2002).

In addition about 250 non-indigenous flowering plants, which have been introduced either accidentally or intentionally, have become naturalized and are referred to as ‘weeds’ (Whistler 1988b and 2002). This research focuses on coastal and nearshore ecosystems, thus it will explain only the littoral vegetation flora of Samoa.

3.5.1 Littoral vegetation

Littoral vegetation covers the coasts and seashore along; “nearly all the undisturbed shores of Samoa, as well as on rocky offshore islets, typically from just above the high tide mark up to 5 or 10 meters elevation, but sometimes to over 100m on steep, exposed slopes” (Whistler, 2002). Nowadays, because the majority of the population has settled along the coasts, the natural vegetation has been modified and replaced by a range of introduced plants. There are mangrove communities and marshland swamps that exist at various coastal location as well as 76 recorded coastal littoral plants noted in Skelton et al. (2000).

Littoral vegetation zones and wetlands identified by Whistler (2002) are found throughout the coasts of the Samoa archipelago. There are many coastal marshes of Eleocharis consisting of the two species, the water chestnut – Eleocharis dulcis (utu’utu) and the Cyclosorus interruptus(vao tuaniu). These are found for example on the main Island of Upolu at the Apolimafou marshland on the northwest coast at Apolima-uta Village. Also, according to Whistler (2002) cyclones together with agriculture were the factors that disturbed most of the other marshes found between the coast of Apolimafou/Apolima-uta and Apia. Because of human activities such as cutting for firewood, the extent of mangrove forests today is much less than it was in the past (Whistler, 2002).

53

Mangrove swamps on coastal areas where rivers meet the sea are fundamental assets to Samoa's environment and people. Three types of mangroves (togo) are found in Samoa, the Rhizophora mangle, Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, and Xylocarpus moluccensis. The common Bruguiera on Upolu Island are found along the southern coast from Lefaga to Safata District, Falelatai on the northwest coast and at Vaiusu Bay near Apia, which was identified as the largest community (Whistler, 2002).

Common coastal strand plants include the Scaevola taccada (to’ito’i), Calophyllum inophyllum(fetau), Hibiscus tiliaceus (fau), Barringtonia asiatica (futu) and the Hernandia nymphaeifolia(pu’a) (Whistler, 2002). Littoral vines that dominate herbaceous strands on sandy shores are the beach morning glory, Ipomoea pes-capre (fue moa), beach pea, Vigna marina (fue sina),Canavalia rosea (fue fai va’a), Canavalia cathartica and the Ipomoea macrantha (Whistler, 2002).

Some other littoral tree species, which are often a single species dominates include Pisoniagrandis (pu’a vai), Erythrina variegata (gatae), Terminalia cattapa and T. samoensis (talie), Thespesia populnea (milo), Guettarda speciosa (pu’apu’a) and Cordia subcordata (tauanave)(Whistler, 2002). The Intsia bijuga (ifilele) the most valuable timber tree is unusually common at least three entirely different substrates. It occurs at some ridges between Fagamalo and northern coast at Masefau in Tutuila, American Samoa while in Savai’i it is restricted on rocky soils on areas of Pu’apu’a volcanics. The best remaining ifilele lowland forest occurs on the clay soils of Fagaloa volcanics on the ridges between Uafato and Ti’avea on Upolu. The Uafato Village harvest this slow-growing climax species commercially for handicraft (Whistler, 2002).

3.6 FAUNA

The fauna of Samoa include native species and a variety of non-indigenous species including mammals, birds, a few reptiles, a wide array of finfish and invertebrates.

Currently 13 species of mammals are found in Samoa and only 3 are native, in which two are flying foxes or fruit bats (pe’a). These are the Samoan flying fox Pteropus s.samoensis, the Tongan/White-necked flying fox, Pteropus tonganus and the insectivorous Sheath-tailed bat,

54

Emballonura semicaudata (tagiti) (MNRE, 2000a). There is a variety of introduced species that are common namely dogs, cats, horses, cattle, goats (and recently sheep) as well as rats such as the Rattus norvegicus, Rattus rattus and the Mus musculus (Taulealo, 1993).

Reptiles are limited and only one land snake, the Pacific Boa (Candola bibroni), has been recorded in Samoa (Taulealo, 1993). There are 14 species of lizards of which only one, the Samoan skink (Emoia samoensis) is endemic to the Samoan archipelago (Taulealo, 1993).

The avifauna of Samoa include 35 species of land birds of which 10 are endemic at the species or sub-species level and four were introduced (SPREP, 1994a). There are also 21 sea birds, recorded or migratory species. (MNRE, 2000a).

Dahl (1986) listed 14 birds as either ‘rare’ or ‘endangered’ (SPREP, 1994a). These include the tooth-billed pigeon, Didunculus strigirostris (manumea); the Gynnomyza samoensis (maomao);Samoan ground dove, Galliclumba stairii (tuaimeo); Island thrush, Turdus poliocephalussamoensis (t t malili); white-browed crake, Poliolimna cinereus (vai); Samoan white-eye, Zosterops samoensis (mata pa’epa’e); and the sooty rail, Porzara tabnensis (Taulealo, 1993). Also the native Samoan wood hen, Pareudiastes pacificus (puna’e) last recorded in 1905 has been assumed to be extinct though a population may still persist on upland Savaii. The Samoan stormpetrel (tai ) was also recently recorded as a single specimen (Taulealo, 1993). Four species were introduced and the common myna, Acridontheres trisis that was introduced in the 1960s has spread rapidly through cultivated areas of Upolu (Taulealo, 1993).

There is also a diversity of terrestrial invertebrates, many of which have not been inventoried. Dahl (1986) recorded 21 butterflies, of which only 2 are endemic to the Samoan archipelago, a swallowtail, Papiliio godeffroy and Hypolimnas thompsoni (Taulealo, 1993).

There are 19 endemic species of land snail found within the Samoan archipelago. The newly established African snail, Achatina fulica, poses a great danger to the existence of endemicspecies. Wilson and Taylor (1967) produced a list of 59 ant species in Samoa, of which 12 are

55

endemic (MNRE, 2000a). The survival and existence of terrestrial fauna is threatened by the increasing demand and pressure on land and forests (Taulealo, 1993).

3.7 MARINE ENVIRONMENT

Zann (1991) stated that the coral reef fauna of Samoa is mainly Indo-western Pacific in origin but impoverished compared to other western Pacific Islands due to its far eastern isolation. The relative poverty of species is partly due to the islands’ origin as they consists of steep sided volcanic cones that are set deep in waters and recent lava flows that covered previous reef areas (Taulealo, 1993).

Similarly, Zann and Mulipola (1995) pointed out that due to volcanic origins, Western Samoa has only a small area of coral reefs and island shelf. Fringing and barrier reefs exist with very shallow lagoons. For example on Upolu Island, reef length is about 271 km with reef area (to 40 meters depth) of about 470 km² (Zann and Mulipola, 1995).

The recorded marine fish fauna in the whole Samoan archipelago identified by Wass (1984) shows 991 species with 890 that inhabit shallow waters/reefs, 56 in deeper waters and 45 pelagic species (MNRE, 2000a). There are 2 species of sea turtles: the green turtle, Chelonia mydas(fonu/laumei) and the hawksbill, Ereimochelys inbricata (laumei) are found in Samoa. A small number of hawksbill breeds on the small-uninhabited Islands off the southeast of Upolu Island and a few beaches in Savaii (Taulealo, 1993).

Seaweeds and other marine organisms are vital for local consumption and as an income source for some people. Bell and Mulipola (1995) stated that there are 3 edible algae (limu) from Samoa, Caulerpa racemosa, Caulerpa sp., and the Halymenia durvillei (Skelton et al., 2000). Skelton and South (1999) recorded algae from both western and eastern Islands of Samoa and listed 198 taxa, which represents about 50-60 of the potential algal flora from Samoa (Skelton etal., 2000).

56

Preliminary results of a survey by Skelton at the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve recorded a total of 297 species of algae, 89 of which are new records for Samoa (Skelton et al., 2000). South and Skelton (1999; 2000) indicated that 4 red algae from Palolo Deep are recognized as new to science, including the Amansia paloloensis, Ceramium upoluense, Ceramium kramerii and the Ceramium rintelsianum, which could be present in other neighbouring Islands, (Skelton et al.,2000). Hartog (1970) recorded 2 seagrass species from Samoa and these are the Halophilaovalis and the Syringodium isoetifolium. Seagrass beds are uncommon in Samoa and the best community is probably found around Manono Island (Skelton et al., 2000).

The other commonly found species important for consumption are the sea cucumbers, Holothuriaatra and Stichopus chloronatus as well as sea urchins. Giant clams, crabs, lobsters, octopus and many shellfish collected by women and children accounted for much of household consumption.

3.7.1 Fisheries

Subsistence fishing is the largest and most important fishing activity in Samoa. Zann (1991) recorded that almost half of all rural households on Upolu go fishing at least once a week and estimated that 33% of households fish for subsistence.

FAO (2002) listed that the most important coastal resources in Samoa in the order of importance are finfish (especially surgeonfish, grouper, mullet, carangids, rabbit fish); octopus, giant clams, bêche-de-mer, turbo snail and crab. Samoilys and Carlos (1990) identified main fisheries in Samoa:

i. coastal fisheries for domestic consumption: fishing carried out byvillagers in small scale and commercial sectors using net, spear, hook, line and hand collection;

ii. coastal fisheries for export: limited range of marine species like sea cucumbers, mainly carried out by local companies, usually in low volume;

iii. oceanic fisheries: tropical tuna fishing carried out by local and distant water fishing long-line vessels within the EEZs of the country’s high seas (UNESCAP, 2003a).

57

Zann (1991) identified coastal and nearshore areas like the shore, lagoon and reefs (Figure 3.2) as the main fishing grounds, which were the focus of fishing activities in villages throughout Samoa.

Figure 3.2: Fishing areas

Source: Samoily and Carlos (1990) in UNESCAP, 2003a

3.7.2 Finfishes

The use of fish catches by households (Figure 3.3) shows that most of the catch is for consumption with the surplus been sold. This practice of selling the catch is most common with fishers living near the town, while rural fishers sell a limited portion within their own village with most of the catch being reserved for local consumption and distributing/sharing with their relatives.

Figure 3.3: Fish uses

Source: Samoily and Carlos (1990) in UNESCAP 2003a

58

Studies show that fish and other marine species provide the main source of protein for the diet ofSamoan people, especially those in the rural villages. Hosch (2000) noted that about 50 to 75% of dietary proteins come from marine foodstuffs (FAO, 2000). Zann (1991) stated that fresh fish is eaten on average of about 2.6 days/week in rural and 1.8 days/week in urban households. He estimated annual average fish consumption for rural households amounted to 360 kg/capita, and 200 kg/capita in urban areas. King’s (1990) estimated subsistence catch of about 4,600 tonnes is about four times greater than the fish sold commercially for local consumption (UNESCAP, 2003a).

In shallow waters the main fish caught include the reefal species of surgeonfish (acanthurids),parrotfish (scarids), soldierfish (holocentrids), wrasses (labrids) and the lagoon species like mullet (mugulids), goatfish (mullids) and trevallies (carangids) (Zann, 1991).

3.7.3 Commercial Contribution and Important Marine Species

Artisanal fishery is quite an important source of income and food not only in rural and urban Samoan but other Pacific communities.

The introduction of catamaran fishing boats (alia) in Samoa has increased commercial fishing in the country not only for sales at the local fish market but also for exports. The estimated total volume of inshore fishery products or seafood landed from July 2002 to June 2003 was about 7000 metric tonnes (mt), and 94% of this landing was harvested through subsistence fishing. The total value of the export volume from this is about 29 mt valued WST$0.25 million (Fisheries Division, 2003).

Through domestic outlets in Samoa, the total volume and value of inshore fishery products amounted to approximately 435 mt valued around WST$4.3 million and the exported volume of this was about 29 mt with a value of WST$0.25 million (Fisheries Division, 2003).

The reef and lagoon finfishes contributed approximately 65% to the domestic market within 1998/1999 in total volume. The main species landed include the parrotfish (fuga) 24.8%,

59

unicornfish (ume) 17.6%, emperors (mata’ele’ele) 11.8%, surgeonfish (alogo, pone) 11.4%, mullet (anae) 10.9% and a few in other species (Skelton et al., 2000).

The main crustaceans sold in the domestic market are the Panulirus lobsters and mangrove crab (Scylla serrata), which accounted for 58% and 35% of the estimated total landings, (Skelton etal., 2000). Giant clams constitute the highest percentage of bivalves landed and sold with 51% followed by the cockle (tugane) with 48%. Other target species included a variety of species of sea cucumbers and octopus (Skelton et al., 2000).

The aquarium trade exists in Samoa and the main fish species exported are Pomacentrus andChrysiptera spp., Labroides spp., Amphiprion spp., and Paracirrhitus spp. (Skelton et al., 2000). In 1993/1994 about 65,527 fishes were exported and figures in 1994/1995 amounted to 30,405 fishes, mainly of assorted damsels, wrasses and angelfish (Skelton et al., 2000). In the early 1990s Samoa earned about WS$47,704 (US$19,635) from tropical fish exports (UNESCAP, 2003a). Live corals have also been commercially exported to overseas aquariums.

3.7.4 Corals and Reefs

As stressed before, reefs and lagoons of Samoa are limited in size. The leeward reefs on the north and west of the main island (Upolu) are relatively wide while windward reefs in the east and south coasts are narrower. Reefs that surround both Islands of Savai’i and Upolu are fairly close to shore and the enclosed lagoons are generally shallow (van Pel, 1960).

Corals of the windward side are well developed and the lagoonal circulation is good with a short water residence time (Zann, 1991). The best-developed reefs of about 90sq km are off the northwest from Apia to Manono on Upolu Island and the 35sq km off northeast Savai’i from Salelologa to Pu’apu’a (Zann, 1991). The major coral types include the branching Poritescylindrica, massive P.cf.lutea, Acropora spp., and Millepora (Zann, 1991).

A preliminary survey conducted in 1991 indicated that the dominant genera of corals at the surveyed sites included the Acropora, Montipora and Pocillopora (Samoilys and Carlos, 1990 in

60

UNESCAP, 2003a). Live coral cover is high in Savai’i (50%), where it is mostly Acroporacompared with only 22% live coral on Upolu (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1: Coral cover for Upolu and Savai’i Islands

Island Hard live coral Dead coral Other Acropora spp. Other corals

Savai’i 16.6% 38.2% 35.0% 10.2% Upolu 7.5% 14.0% 14.0% 64.5% Source: Sulu et al., 2002

Table 3.1 shows high live coral percentage in Savai’i than Upolu. The reason that there is less dead coral cover or rubble in Savai’i could be that the reefs there are under less pressure compared to the densely populated Island of Upolu.

Green (1996) surveyed 7 sites on Upolu Island, finding that despite cyclones and other impacts on reefs, the reef fronts of surveyed areas were in reasonably good condition with healthy coral and fish assemblages and dense stands of plate corals at the sites. The reefs at Fagaloa where effluents of a hydro dam empty, as well as those at Vaitele, the industrial area, were also described as being exceptionally good in condition with lush coral communities and abundant fish diversity (Green, 1996). However the sites were outside the lagoons which are susceptible more to terrestrial pollution.

3.8 LAND AND MARINE TENURE

The traditional ownership and management of land and sea in Samoa is based on its hierarchical chiefly system hierarchy. About 81% of land in Samoa is labelled as customary land, although the trend toward individual ownership of these lands is increasing (SPREP, 1994a).

Customary lands are communally owned and allocated for usage in particular villages under their chiefly structure. Land ownership is determined by a combination of awarded titles and genealogy and is under the trusteeship of the chiefs (matai) (Taulealo, 1993).

61

The sea area, from the coast to the reef is for fishing and is also under the ownership and management of each village but also more widely used by people within a district unless a village imposes a taboo on their fishing grounds from neighbouring villages or outsiders. Subsistence and artisanal fishing are mostly done in nearshore areas and lagoon (Taulealo, 1993).

The open sea beyond the reef is difficult to control and is openly used particularly for commercial fishers who use catamaran motorboats (alia). The vast ocean under the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (Figure 3.4) of Samoa is controlled and managed by the Government of Samoa with the assistance from regional organizations like the SPC and FFA (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The exclusive economic sea area shows that Independent Samoa is surrounded by bordering American Samoa (east), Tokelau and Tuvalu (north), Fiji (west) and Tonga (south), making Samoa a country with a land area of 2,935 km², the country with the smallest 200 nautical-mile EEZ in the Pacific (Figure 3.4).

Figure 3.4: Map showing Exclusive Economic Zone of Pacific and Samoa

Source: adapted from King (1991)

62

The country’s EEZ sea area covers only 120,000km², which is quite small in terms of development of the offshore pelagic commercial fishing and in comparison to the EEZ of other large or smaller Pacific Island countries in terms of population and land area (King, 1991). For example, Kiribati has a land area of 690 km² and a population of 64,000 with an EEZ of 3,550,000 km² and American Samoa has 197 km² and population of 36,000 with 390,000 km² EEZ area (King, 1991). As a result, Samoa has a disproportionately high dependence on its nearshore fisheries resources, the focus of this thesis.

3.9 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES

Coasts, shorelines and beaches are essential in Samoa as in other Pacific Islands, for settlement and providing a basis for sustainable livelihoods. The coastline of the country is around 437km consisting of about 211 km in Savai’i while Upolu together with neighbouring smaller islands accounts for some 226 km (Zann, 1999). Recent volcanic activities experienced in Savaii in the early 1900s caused lava flows that stretched outwards and covered the coasts of Sale’aula and Samalae’ulu Villages at the central north of Savai’i Island.

The Island of Upolu has coral reefs and lagoons extending some 220 km and Savai’i has only 57 km in area (Zann, 1999). Reefs nearly encircle the whole island of Upolu and Richmond (1991) stated that fringing reefs are the most common with barrier and patch reefs in scattered areas. Fringing and patch reefs are normally found on Upolu Island where barrier reefs are shallow (Richmond, 1991).

Beaches occur as semi-continuous stretches of coast bounded by rock headlands, and pocket beaches are common on Upolu Island (Richmond, 1991). The largest continuous beach on Upolu is fronting the Vaie’e Peninsula barrier spit on southern Upolu (Richmond, 1991).

Kear and Wood (1959) categorized the coasts of Upolu Island in three subdivisions based on reef characteristics, depositional features and inshore geology. These divisions are further subdivided into various types (Figure 3.5).

63

64

Kear and Woods (1959) describe Type I as consisting of wide fringing reef transitional to a shallow barrier reef where coastal deposits are poorly developed. Type II refers to cliffed coasts with little or no reef development and limited or no depositional features (Richmond, 1991). Type III include coasts that occur either as fringing reef and narrow coastal strip mostly of storm derived sand beach ridges (Richmond, 1991). Type III has beaches, barrier spits, and coastal swamps associated with rivers and streams. Also Type III coastlines are fronted by slightly wider fringing reef but with prominent gaps where occurrence of freshwater output is high (Richmond, 1991).

3.10 DEMOGRAPHY

The 2001 census showed that the population of Independent Samoa is just under 180,000 (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2: Total population of Samoa from 1976 – 2001

1976 1981 1986 1991 2001150,983 156,341 157,156 161,298 176,710

Source: Department of Statistics (1993)

The 2001 census indicated that the total population had reached 176,710 with 92,050 (52%) males and 84,660 (48%) females (Statistical Services, 2001). This reflects a 10% increase from the rise of about 15,412 people within 10 years from the total population of 161,298 in 1991.

The younger age group still dominates the total population, with about 71,978 people below age 15 in 2001, which accounted for 41% of the total population (Statistical Services, 2001). This indicates that increasing population in the future will place greater pressures on the limited coastal and nearshore resources of Samoa.

3.11 ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

The economy of Samoa is dominated by subsistence agriculture and related activities that support about 75% of the population, especially those in rural areas (Taulealo, 1993). The Asian

65

Development Bank (2000) also noted that the majority of the workforce is employed in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. There is a limited range of exports, mainly agricultural crops, marine resources and a little in manufacturing. Export contributions to the economy include fish, mainly tuna, and to a lesser extent taro, copra and recently kava and the nonu fruits (Morindacitrifolia) being sold for production of the noni juice for medicinal purposes.

Some manufacturing contributes to the economy of the country. These include the Vailima Brewery and the Yazaki Company that employs more than 500 workers, predominantly females, in producing motor vehicle wires for export overseas. From 1985 to 1989 the manufacturing share in the real GDP remained at about 12% (Asian Development Bank, 2000).

The macroeconomic performance of Samoa has grown strongly within the last decade, with strong input from fisheries export. The increase of 3.1% growth in 1998 showed a 27% growth in fishing (Asian Development Bank, 2000). Annual fishing production for Samoa in the late 1990s as recorded by Gillet and Lightfoot (2002) shows that subsistence fishing contributed about 4,293 mt with a value of USD$ 7,143 and coastal commercial fishing provided about 3,086 mt with a value of USD$ 6,583.

In 1985 to 1989 economic growth was 2.5%, which reflected economic reforms in the mid–1980s and the contribution of strong tourist receipts and remittances (Asian Development Bank, 2000). Tourism is now a very significant industry in the country as in the early 1980s tourism grew from 5% to 10 – 15% of the GDP (Asian Development Bank, 2000).

The tropical cyclones Ofa and Val that affected Samoa in 1990 and 1991 were a setback to the economy, and in addition the country was hit by the taro blight fungus in the early 1990s that devastated the taro commodity that at the time was the backbone of Samoa’s agricultural exports. However, McGregor (1999) stated that after the disastrous cyclones that damaged crops and property, the economy of Samoa recovered rapidly with the real GDP that grew from 6.7% in 1996 (UNDP, 1999). The GDP weakened in 1997 to a growth of 1.7% but recovered to 3.1% in 1998 and currently reflect a sustained growth of 3-4%, (Samoa Treasury Department,

66

2002). Agricultural exports have weakened and tourism and remittances have become significant in the economy of Samoa.

Remittances from overseas Samoans to their relatives at home were the major source of external income (Asian Development Bank, 2000). In 1992 net private transfers into Samoa contributed 29% to the country’s GDP while 31% was from exports of goods and services (Pacific Economic Bulletin, 1994 in Brown and Walker, 1995). This shows the significant of remittances and in 2002 remittances earned about $188.06 million tala and it increased to $189.37 million tala in 2003 (CBS, 2004).

3.12 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

Destructions of coastal and marine resources is caused by pressures from high population, desperate activities due low standard of living, commercial fishing and many other factors leading to decline in resources. Zann and Mulipola (1995) reported that the status of fish stocks in Samoa had declined in the past 10 years according to almost 80% of the interviewed fishers.

Other developments like agriculture, logging, construction and infrastructure have contributed to erosion, pollution and sedimentation. Furthermore, there is pressure from natural catastrophes such as tropical cyclones, global warming and associated sea level rise and climate changes that cause problems like coral bleaching and coastal erosion.

3.12.1 Natural Events

No other cyclone in the history of Samoa have had the destructive impact inflicted on land and marine resources as compared to the effects of cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991.

Cyclone Ofa in February 1990 stripped the upper portion of outer reefs of living coral and covered the lagoons and reef flats with fragmented coral debris (UNESCAP, 2003a). These coral fragments covered and smashed the lagoon corals and completely eliminated the lagoon fauna on exposed reefs. As a result the most destroyed reefs were those along the western and

67

northern coast on the Islands, especially Upolu. Cyclone Val that followed in December 1991 intensified and compounded the damage caused by Ofa earlier (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The cyclones Ofa 1990 and Val 1991 altered the physical nature of the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve and its adjacent reef area (Lovell and Toloa, 1994). The massive waves during the cyclones removed the existing coral reef and scoured the reef front down to bare rock with a large portion of it finding its way onto the reef crest as rubble banks. As a result much of this material was deposited in Palolo Deep forming rubble slopes on the northern and western sides (Lovell and Toloa, 1994).

On the coast east of Apia reef slope corals were destroyed by cyclone Ofa. Cyclone banks of about 30 to 50 metres wide, 2.5 metres high and 1 km in length nearly covers the full length of the exposed reef (Zann, 1991). At Fagaloa Bay the fringing reefs were well developed around the edge of the Bay but cyclone Ofa caused severe damage there, especially in the eastern shore (Zann, 1991). Destruction by cyclone Ofa was estimated at about $300 million in damage and this exacerbated in 1991 by cyclone Val, which cost at least $600 million in damage (SPREP, 1994a).

Other recent cyclones that have caused significant destruction to Samoa include cyclones Heta in January 2004 and Olaf in February 2005. Both caused damages to property and the terrestrial and marine environments.

3.12.2 Coastal Deforestation and Reclamation

It was estimated that 20% of nursery grounds for nearshore marine species including finfish, some bivalves and crustaceans have been lost to reclamation activities (Zann in Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Mangrove communities throughout Samoa suffer due to reclamation. For example, two-thirds of the coastline between Apia and Faleolo airport on the northwest coast of Upolu Island has been incrementally reclaimed (SOPAC, 2003). Much of the area around Apia town in Upolu used to be

68

covered with vast mangroves, such as the Fugalei area where the agricultural domestic market is now located, as well as shops and other businesses.

One of the best Rhizophora mangrove scrubs in Samoa was along the northeast coast of Upolu at Taumeasina Peninsula in the village of Moata’a near Apia. However, this large mangrove area has been reclaimed for a proposed tourist resort as well as a road. In 1970, it was estimated that the mangrove area was about 9.1 hectares and by 1990 only 5.0 hectares of mangroves remained (Suluvae in Environment Forum, 2000b). Currently this same site has now been sold to a different overseas business with similar developments in planning stage.

The drainage pattern of the tidal channel at this mangrove area has been completely changed: the channel widened while the mangrove fringe narrowed in 1990 compared to 1970. About half of the mangroves have been lost as well as the depletion of other marine organisms (Suluvae in Environment Forum, 2000b).

3.12.3 Sedimentation and other Stream Link Problems to Nearshore Ecosystems

The rivers and streams transport terrestrial materials, rubbish and sediments from upstream land areas to the shores and coastal areas. The Vaisigano River in Apia for example, was reported as being turbid and carried a large amount of silt into the Apia harbour during heavy rains. FAO (1993) reported that watersheds are steep and rivers wash silt directly onto adjacent reefs in the vicinity of Apia (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Rivers cause sedimentation on the coasts and can inhibit coral growth. Studies in 1975 and 1981 showed that the seabed in the central and eastern parts of the Apia harbour swallowed up to five feet in the six year period due to heavy sedimentation from upstream (Gauss in Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Dumping of wastes along the coasts and in rivers all ended up in the sea, thus causing coral stress and destruction. The reef adjacent Letogo Stream near Vailele Village on the east of Apia experienced sedimentation (Zann, 1991). The inner lagoon of Fagaloa Bay is strongly terrestrial influenced and fringing reefs there have a low live coral cover (Zann, 1991).

69

3.12.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution

In previous years the dumping site within the Apia urban area was the mangrove community at Vaitoloa, Vaiusu Bay, before it shifted to its current location at Tafaigata, inland from Apia. It was estimated that about 17,000 cubic metres of solid wastes used to be dumped at the old Vaitoloa site annually (SPREP, 1994a). There is evidence that in the low-lying areas of Apia, ground water is being polluted by effluent from many of the sewage disposal facilities (SPREP, 1994a).

The area at Vaitele in Upolu and surrounding areas like the Vaiusu Bay and Mulinuu lagoon face waste problems from industrial effluents pumping straight from factories like the Vailima Brewery, beef cannery, copra mill and other industries. Also waste and thermal water as well as polluted effluents drained to the coasts contribute to eutrophication and poisoning of marine organisms (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Sewage is a contributing factor to eutrophication. For example, an open drain used to discharge sewage effluent from the Tusitala hotel in Apia into the tidal area of the Fugalei stream. This contained high concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus and faecal coliform bacteria (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Effluents from the brewery factory at Vaitele area also contained high concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus that ended up at the coast. The high content of phosphorus caused algal growth in undesirable amounts (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

The very high faecal coliform concentrations in stream flows, especially the Fugalei stream indicate the contamination of Vaiusu Bay and cause contamination of shellfish like the Gafraruimsp. (tugane), which threatens human health. As well, the loss of the sea slug Dolabellaauricularia (gau), may be caused by the poor water quality of the area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Poisons, chemicals and land-based wastes washed down by rivers can result in smothering and killing of coral reefs. Widespread use of pesticides or herbicides such as the commonly used Paraquat or Gramoxone, especially upstream near water catchment areas, can leach into rivers. Consequently, these poisons can end up at sea killing fish and other marine organisms like

70

bivalves that accumulate high body levels of pesticides from waters that contain a low concentration (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

3.12.5 Dredging and Sand Mining

Small-scale mining is practised in Samoa by families and villages for construction and beautification of villages. Sand is useful in many developments like housing, reclamation, cement production and other uses. Commercial large-scale sand mining operations caused environmental problems in the 1980s. Carter's study in 1991 recorded that between 1970 and 1983 sand and gravel were mined to a depth of about eight metres within a few metres of the shoreline (SOPAC and SPREP, 1994).

The commercial sand mining operation at Mulinu’u in Apia is still in process and supply for activities like land reclamation, road building and construction. Consequently, the lagoon at this area has now been deepened and the habitat of many marine organisms of the area has been destroyed. For example, Bell (1985) stated that dredging is suspected of causing the disappearance of the sea hare, Dolabella auricularia (gau) from Mulinu’u area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991). This problem exacerbated because of the presence of the rubble seawall at the time.

When the Apia harbour was built in 1964, major dredging and construction took place for land reclamation resulting in sand erosion due to the then poorly constructed seawall. This resulted in huge boulders and rocks replacing the beaches along Apia coast (Carter 1991 in Solomon 1994). As a result of material dredged from the harbor the fringing reef in Apia harbour has been almost entirely reclaimed.

3.12.6 Infra-structural Development and Impacts

Activities like road and resort construction, farming, logging and deforestation increase sediment loading into rivers, for example the streams and rivers that wash down silt directly onto adjacent reefs in the Apia area (Klinckhamers, 1992).

71

There are business developments along the rural coasts of Upolu and Savai’i but their impacts are not so severe compared to the urban areas. In Apia about 75% of the shoreline has been replaced by seawalls that were constructed after cyclones Ofa 1990 and Val in 1991. Also about 12 ha of the shore had been reclaimed from the lagoon for buildings and the harbor (Zann, 1991).

Beach erosion has occurred due to coastal alterations, for example beach erosion at Mulinu’u Peninsula as a result of seawall construction. The seawall also along the east coast road of Fagali’i Village on the east of Apia was swept off by strong waves during cyclone Ofa (Zann, 1991).

Unplanned seawalls alter the equilibrium of beach ecosystems when waves and currents do not follow the normal pattern of reaching the shoreline. They cause the erosion of sand when the currents hit the straight seawall and wash off the sand when they recede. Andrew and Holthus (1988) recorded that fishers from Aleipata village at the eastern end of Upolu Island claimed that coastal erosion had become a severe problem there. This was seen by the width of the beach and foreshore that eroded from 20 to 50 metres due to the change in wave patterns and inshore currents caused by the docking area constructed at the area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

The Afulilo hydroelectric dam (Figure 4.6) on Upolu Island at Ta’elefaga Village in Fagaloa District degraded particularly the marine environment of Fagaloa Bay. Surface drainage into the Dam surpassed expectations and caused overflows. The generators that operate the dam are located at Taelefaga Village and the people there experience noise pollution. The velocity of the stream that goes through the village has increased with additional water being discharged from the powerhouse. The nutrient level of sediment increases and it turns the flowing stream water smelly and discolored (Onorio and Tamata, 1997).

The above study stated that the Afulilo Dam has caused the disappearance of some marine species from Fagaloa Bay. The scad mackerel, Selar crumenophthalmus (atule), a seasonal finfish, and a number of shellfishes and other invertebrates, such as seahares and urchins that are no longer found (Onorio and Tamata, 1997) (Table 3.3).

72

Table 3.3: Marine organisms now absent from Fagaloa Bay

SAMOAN NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Atule Purse eye scad Selar crumenophthalmusAlili Turban shell Turbo chrysostomus and T.setosusTugane Venus shell Gafrarium tumiidumFole Pen shell Pinna sp.Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auriculariaFatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus sp.Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaeiSOURCE: adapted from Onorio and Tamata (1997)

It was believed that the disappearance of these species may have been caused by over-fishing but large numbers of dead juvenile shellfish in the Bay suggest that the problem is mainly due to the changes in the discharge of Taelefaga Stream. Also sedimentation increase was due to the establishment of the power station and the Afulilo Dam (Onorio and Tamata, 1997).

3.13 OVER-HARVESTING AND EXPLOITATION OF MARINE SPECIES

The increasing subsistence and commercial importance of many marine resources together with low standard of living, increasingly leads to the over-exploitation of many resources.

The giant clam species (Hippopus hippopus) is the only known marine species being extinct from waters of Samoa. However, many fish and other marine species have significantly declined as a result of over-harvesting and destructive fishing.

Zann (1991) explained some possible reasons for the decline of inshore fish stocks:

over-fishing due to increasing demand

use of effective and modern but not selective fishing techniques

use of destructive techniques such as poisons and dynamite, and

the loss of fish habitat through reclamation, coral sand mining and surface runoff.

Zann (1991) stated that due to over-fishing inshore reefs and coral reef habitats had been severely stressed. The problem of selling of undersized lobsters, crabs and finfishes and other marine organisms has been witnessed at the fish market in Apia town. This is a problem because monitoring and enforcement of regulations relating to marine species are very weak.

73

On Upolu, Samoilys and Carlos (1990) categorize over-fishing of fish stocks on some reefs and habitats in two types:

I. Growth over-fishing: This is shown by undersized reef species selling at local market, including wide range of finfishes, crabs, lobsters and clams;

II. Stock over-fishing: Some fish species and invertebrates were so heavily fished that they became locally endangered. These include the giant clams (Tridacnasquamosa, and T. maxima) that are now rare in many locations (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Alternatively, the declines in landings of some species can probably also be attributed to reduction of fishing in some rural households due to the improved economic situation of many subsistence households and the availability of cheap imported frozen meat foods (Zann, 1991).

Preliminary surveys by Samoilys and Carlos in 1990 of selected reef fish species and habitats at particular reef sites around Upolu Island show that hard substrate (consisting of dead coral and rock with less coverage of live hard and soft corals) dominated all upper reef slopes and lagoons being surveyed (UNESCAP, 2003a). It was seen at the surveyed areas that the higher the cover of hard substrate, the greater the increase in fish abundance and biomass. However, this relationship was stronger on the outer reef slopes. They concluded that biomasses were lowest and mean sizes of individuals were smallest in the heavily fished inshore lagoons. The deeper and outer reef slopes have the highest biomasses and large sizes of selected species; and finally, that highest biomass and sizes were found on reef slopes at the least fished sites (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The sizes of finfishes have decreased due to over-harvesting of the common species. For example Mulipola (1997) recorded that the sizes fell for the majority of surgeonfishes – Acanthuridae lineatus, Ctenochaetus striatus and Naso spp. within the 16–20 cm length interval (Mulipola, 2002). Most parrotfishes and wrasses caught (about 61%) were between 16cm to 30cm. About 70% of emperors caught were within 16-20 cm length with trevallies between 16cm and 30cm. Much of the recorded harvested catch was below the minimum legal sizes under the Fisheries Regulations of 1995 (Mulipola, 2002).

74

Decline in some taxa has been shown by the decrease in landings at the fish market of the big eye scads, Selar crumenopthalmus (atule) from 12.5 to 0.5 metric tonne (mt) between 1986 and 1987; giant clams Tridacna spp (faisua) from 10 to 0.1 mt; trevallies, Carangidae (malauli) from 20 to 1 mt; mullet, Mugulidae (anae) from 27 to 2.5 mt; coral cods, serranids (gatala) from 12 to 0.6 mt and parrotfish, scarids (fuga) from 27 to 4.9 mt (Mulipola, 2002).

Shellfishes that had been over-harvested included the top shell, Tectis pyramis (ali’ao) and turban snails, Turbo chrysostomus and T. setosus (alili) that has been depleted or become rare in some areas due to over-fishing (Zann, 1991). On the northwest of Upolu Island fishers reported that some gastropods like the sea hare, Dolabella (gau) and the edible sipunculid worm, Siponosoma (ipo) have virtually disappeared with similar declines in species like the jellyfish Cassiopea (alu’alu) and the sea cucumber Stichopus horridus gonads (sea). Even the paloloworm Eunice viridis was reported to have vanished from this area (Zann, 1991).

The two existing species of clams, the Tridacna squamosa and Tridacna maximum, were heavilyfished and severely depleted in most areas with the species Hippopus hippopus having become extinct (Taulealo, 1993). The crown-of-thorns starfish predator, the giant triton, Charonia tritoniawas dramatically reduced as a result of over-fishing for the ornamental trade (Skelton et al.,2000).

Five companies in Samoa began harvesting and exporting bêche-de-mer to Chinese markets in late 1992 and by 1995 this stock has declined greatly (UNESCAP, 2003a). Bell (1996) noted that data from the Fisheries Division showed export of sea cucumbers/bêche-de-mer by species composition, weight and valued indicated a decline in several species due to over-fishing, and the department in 1995 set up a certification of fishery products for exports (UNESCAP, 2003a).

3.13.1 Fishing Methods

Apart from cyclones, pollution and developments, changes in fishing techniques have contributed to the decline of marine resources. Zann (1991b) recorded that the main fishing techniques widely used in Samoa include spear fishing (50%), nets (31%), hook and line (16%) and gleaning or collecting (3.6%).

75

With increasing importance of fish commercially and increasing local demand for fresh fish and seafoods, illegal and destructive methods have been used by some fishers. Illegal fishing practices used by people include dynamite fishing, chemicals like bleaches and toxic plants. For example, the commonly used plant, the Derris elliptica vine and the nut of the Barringtoniaasiatica (King, 1995).

Efficient methods also increase catches nowadays, for example the use of torches by diving/spearing fishers at night as well as cast and gill nets that take various sizes of fish.

3.13.2 Threats to Corals and Reefs

Human impacts that affect coral reefs in Samoa include river sedimentation; rubbish and waste disposal such as sewage and domestic wastes; industrial wastes; population increase and settlement; sand mining; agriculture; tourism; over-fishing; fishing methods and in addition, natural events particularly tropical cyclones.

Even though Green (1996) recorded healthy corals at the surveyed sites, this was a reflection of the reef fronts only; the lagoonal sites were severely affected, indicating an immediate threat compared with the front reef sites. Dead corals and structural damage at some reef site lagoons show that lagoons are being damaged, which could be caused by dynamite or crown-of-thorns starfish (Green, 1996).

Pesticides have been suggested as a contributing factor to the outbreak of the coral predator the crown-of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci (alamea). Zann (1991) stated that the serious effect and severe damage on reef ecosystems caused by tropical cyclones and outbreaks of the crown- of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci, contributed to the destruction of large areas of reefs on Upolu Island within the last twenty years.

The first recorded outbreak of the crown-of-thorns starfish in Samoa was in 1969 on the south coast of Upolu Island. Between 1978 and 1985 large outbreaks at other areas in Upolu occurred whilst Savai’i Island experienced large outbreaks from 1980 to 1987, (UNESCAP, 2003a). The government and villagers tried to control the problem and as a result the southern and eastern reefs of the country recovered quickly.

76

The northern and western reefs were subjected to greatest stress due to fishing activities and pollution, thus causing severe damage to living corals (UNESCAP, 2003a).

3.14 MANAGEMENT AND LEGISLATIONS

The Councils of Chiefs (fono) in Samoa are the traditional sole authority in villages entrusted with managing of farmland, forests and nearshore marine resources. The community based Samoa Fishing Project started in 1995 as the Fishing Extension by the Government of Samoa under the Fisheries Department with financial aid from Australia resulted in many villages setting up their marine reserves (Ropeti, 2004). This includes the nursing of giant clams and conservation of coral areas and by doing this the villages set up their own by-laws and regulations to manage their reserves. Faasili and Taua (2001) recorded the success rate of this village management programme (Table 3.4) based on six-monthly reviews.

Table 3.4: Summary of the six-monthly review of villages carried out in December 2000

Degree of success Upolu Savai’i Total Achievement 85% and over 14 11 25 4250-84% 22 10 32 53Less 50% 3 32 3 5Total 39 21 60 100Source: Faasili and Taua (2001)

The table 3.3 illustrates that 42% of the villages under the Samoa Fishing Project are doing very well, with 52% doing reasonably well and 5% that are not performing. By 2004 a total of 76 villages were under the programme with 48 from Upolu and Manono and 28 from Savai’i (Ropeti, 2004).

The government of Samoa have in place some legislation and laws that protect natural resources. The Fisheries Act 1988 provide regulations and laws regarding the use and management of marine resources (Peteru, 1993). The National Parks and Reserves Act 1974 contain legislations for Marine Parks and Reserves and so does the Lands, Surveys and Environment Act 1989, which manages and protects natural resources and environment (Peteru, 1993). Eventhough these legislations and by-laws exist they need to be enforced in order to achieve their purposes and conserve resources.

77

CHAPTER FOUR STUDY VILLAGES AND COASTAL BIODIVERSITY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Chapter 4 provides background information on the four case study villages on the Island ofUpolu. These include three from the northeast coast – Vailele near Apia and Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa – and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga on the southwest coast on the Island of Upolu (Figure 4.1).

The first part (4.2 – 4.5) provides background information on the population, social structure, and sources of income as well as the physical environment of the study villages. The second part (4.6 – 4.8) presents the results of the field survey on the range, frequency and status of coastal and nearshore biodiversity.

4.2 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT

The census of Samoa in 2001 shows the total population in the four study villages (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1: Population of the Study Villages as of 2001

Villages Male Female Total % to district Av. # H/hold Vailele 1,650 1,525 3,175 45.42 7Ma’asina 89 70 159 9.54 8Ta’elefaga 89 93 182 10.92 7Gagaifolevao 269 263 532 14.33 7

Source: adapted from Statistical Services, 2001.

Table 4.1 shows the high population of Vailele compared to the rural villages of Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Gagaifolevao. Vailele contains 45% of Vaimauga east population, making it the most populous of the four villages of its district, largely as a result of internal migration in which many people relocate especially from rural to urban areas. The average number of people per household is much the same throughout the study areas, though there were large extended and immediate families of more than 10 people.

78

79

The centralisation within Apia town of services such as better health facilities, schools, paid employment were the main attraction for the majority of the migrants who opted to move from rural to urban areas. Vailele near Apia is densely populated with the traditional village site along the main road near the coast while the majority of the migrant population lives further inland on freehold land. Vailele’s population was 1,276 in 1991 (Department of Statistics, 1993) and in 2001 the population had increased to 3,175 (Statistical Services, 2001).

Gagaifolevao comprises 14.5% of Lefaga District’s population. The majority of Gagaifolevao’s population in previous years settled on the flat coastal area near the sea but after Cyclones Ofa and Val in 1990 and 1991 many people shifted inland.

Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga comprise about 20.5% of Vaa-o-Fonoti/Fagaloa District’s population. Because Fagaloa area descends abruptly from steep high mountains to the narrow flat low-lying coastal plain (Figure 4.2), the populations of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina like other Fagaloa Villages are concentrated along the narrow coastal plain next to the sea.

Figure 4.2: Steepmountainousarea of Fagaloaoverlooking the Fagaloa Bay

The plantations and farms are located mainly on steep hillsides and the road connecting the main road to the coast cuts through the mountains behind Ta’elefaga Village.

80

4.3 SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND GENDER ROLES

All villages in Samoa follow the same structure of the hierarchical chiefly system (Figure 4.3). The social structure in Samoa establishes the roles of the villagers themselves in various social groups and as individuals. Extended and immediate Samoan families also function this way as people of the community act and work according to their roles.

Figure 4.3: Samoan social structure

Council of Chiefs (Fono a Matai)

1. High chiefs (Ali'i) 2. Talking chiefs/ orators (Tulafale)

Chiefs' wives

Unmarried women Sa'oao/Aualuma

Untitled men (Aumaga/Taulele'a

Children(Tamaiti)

1. Faletua 2. Tausi

As seen in figure 4.3 the village council (fono) and its member chiefs (matai) constitute the apex of the structure. As such, it has the authority over the communal ownership of village assets including land and fishing grounds. The improvement and standard of a village is determined by the decisions and vision of the fono. The council of chiefs vary in villages in the way they function and make use of their natural resources, whether in a sustainable or unsustainable manner.

81

Since each extended family in a village belongs to a certain high chief they are entitled to land for settlement and plantations allocated by the village council under its structure. However, neither a chief nor his family owns the land as it is technically village/community land; thus a village council can banish any chief or person from the village or from village land for misconduct.

The untitled men (aumaga) are the backbone of any community as they carry out the heavy chores and work in serving the village chiefs’ council and their families. They do manual labour like communal fishing when the village council has a meeting, fishing for their families, working in their plantations and doing the cooking in an earthen oven (umu) and boiling on open fire (saka).

The chiefs’ wives (faletua, tausi) and unmarried women (aualuma) in villages carry out duties like weaving and participate in beautification of their villages as well as reef gleaning activities. The women in villages make up the women’s committee, which deals with village hygiene and making handicraft such as baskets, fans, thatches and blinds of traditional houses (fale) as well as weaving mats (fala) and fine mats (ietoga). The children assist the women and older siblings at home with light family chores thus adopting the roles they will carry out within the family and community when they are older.

4.4 SOURCES OF INCOME IN VILLAGES STUDIED

In the case study villages most of the adults are not formally employed and many of the familymembers work in their plantation, fish and carry out domestic chores.

Agricultural products like taro and bananas are taken to the market in town to earn income and buy other family necessities. Apart from these crops kava is one of the main income earning commodities for Fagaloa people; tobacco is grown, but for individual use and not commercially.

There are no formal businesses established in these rural villages to offer formal employment and those who are formally employed commute to and from work in Apia Town. A few men work part-time in Ta’elefaga in shifts operating the generators of the hydro power station, thus earning income as well as working in their plantations.

82

At Gagaifo, various commercial activities such as exporting small coloured finfish and coral from its lagoon took place in previous years although these operations no longer exist. These individual family businesses mined and exported corals and small coloured finfish to Asian markets in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

The main sources of village income are their farms/plantations and some particularly from fishing mainly in Vailele Village (Figures 4.4 a and 4.4b).

Figure 4.4a: Selling sea cucumbers and urchins at roadside Figure 4.4b: Fisher gathering sea urchin (Vailele)

Vailele is a fishing village where as seen in figure 4.4b many women fish in the inshore area for shellfish and other seafood like sea hares, sea cucumbers and sea urchins for subsistence needs and limited sales along the roadside.

The household surveys carried out in the four villages illustrate the uses of seafood catches by families (Figure 4.5).

Household uses of catch at the four study villages

2%

42%

56%

eat

sell & eat

eat &distributeto families

Figure 4.5: Households use of catch

83

Figure 4.5 demonstrates that 42% of the seafood collected is sold. Some respondents stated that the large fishes, lobsters and crabs are sold and the surpluses of small size species (about quarter of the catch) are normally eaten by the family. On the basis of this estimation, consumption of fishers’ catches according to the household survey ranges from 50 to 65%.

4.5 COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS OF STUDY VILLAGES

The coastal and nearshore (gataifale) areas include settlement near the sea, the beach and shore (mat faga), lagoon (aloalo) and the reef (a’au). According to the category of coastal types (Figure 3.5.) stated by Kear and Wood (1959) Fagaloa (where Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina locates) falls under coastline Type II, containing cliff coasts and little or no reef development, while Vailele and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga fall under Type III, with features like beaches, coastal swamps associated with rivers and fringing reefs with gaps due to freshwater outputs (Richmond, 1991).

Zann (1991) recorded the coast of Fagaloa Bay as about 8 km with 210 hectares of reefal area. Reefs are present at Fagaloa Bay but not well developed, especially at Ta’elefaga Village where an opening in the reef exists in the middle coast of the Bay (see Figure 4.6). Steep mountains overlook Fagaloa Bay with a number of rivers and creeks flowing out into the sea (Figure 4.6).

84

Figure 4.6: Fagaloa showing river patterns and coastline

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.6 shows the patterns of the rivers that flow from the high mountains of Fagaloa, which have a great impact on the coast and marine environment of this area. As a result sedimentation is the main problem facing the marine environment of Fagaloa area. The water from Afulilo Dam (Figure. 4.6) diverts through a tunnel to the hydro-electricity power station at Ta’elefaga Village and is later discharged to the Taelefaga River and the lagoon of the village.

At Lefaga Bay where Gagaifo Village is located the coast extends from Matafa’a to the Return to Paradise beach at Matautu (Figure 4.7). Zann (1991) records that the coast of Lefaga Bay is about 12 km in length and there are 460 ha of reef area and 8.2 km of reef edge. Also the wider in-filled barrier reef that is 0.5 to 1.3km wide extends from this area of Matafa’a to Matautu, from where it narrows into a fringing reef of about 50 to 100 metres wide (Figure 4.7).

85

Figure 4.7: The coast of Lefaga showing the scattered settlement of Gagaifolevao

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.7 shows that the only River (called Liua le Vai o Sina) in Lefaga District is located to the west of Falease’ela Village and a mangrove community exists in its estuary near Matafa'a Village.In contrast with the villages of Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, Gagaifo’s lagoon is largely covered with corals and fringing reefs, particularly to the west of the village. The sparsely scattered population is obvious from the aerial photograph with people having spread along the roads from the coast inland and more relocated inland after the cyclones in the early 1990s.

The lagoon of Gagaifo is shallow though deeper and deep on the east end and near the reef. There is also a flattened coral rubble bank on the reef at the west, which according to some respondents was deposited during the cyclone in 1966.

86

In Gagaifo Village, lava rock outcrops with pockets of sand in between extend from shore to the lagoon mainly on the western and eastern ends of the village with pocket beaches that also exist (Figure 4.8).

Figure 4.8: The west area lagoon of Gagaifo showing corals, fringing reef and pocket beach (Masavai)

Lava rocks & corals/ fringing reefs.

Fringing reefs at Gagaifo normally do not emerged at low tide except during extremely low spring tides as seen in Figure 4.8.

Zann (1991) reported that the inshore lagoon of Vailele is dominated by seagrass beds (Syringodium isoetifolum), which have spread possibly as a result of nutrient pollution due to discharged wastes from a piggery and a soap factory at Vailele in the late 1970s to the 1980s.

The coast/shore of Vailele is mainly flat and sandy with a wide shallow lagoon except near the Bay of Vailele near Letogo on the east where the lagoon tends to become deep (Figure 4.9).

87

Figure 4.9: Aerial photograph of Vailele showing dense population, lagoon and reef area

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.9 shows the high population density of Vailele that is concentrated along the coast and extends further inland. Small streams are present at the ends of Vailele at the two neighbouring villages. Zann (1991) noted that sedimentation occurred on the reefs adjacent the Letogo Stream on the east and Fagali’i Stream on the west of Vailele. The reef of Vailele is well developed but after the 1990 and 1991 cyclones islands of coral rubble were deposited on the reef flat of Vailele.

4.6 RESULTS: COASTAL VEGETATION AND USEFUL PLANTS

The coastal vegetation of the study areas is quite similar with the occurrence of the same coastal trees, shrubs, creepers and weeds. The 10 detailed questionnaire with social groups of men and women in the four villages (3 each from large villages of Vailele and Gagaifo and 2 each from small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga) recorded a variety of coastal trees, shrubs and creepers, and identified those considered most important in their villages (Table 4.2).

88

Table 4.2: Coastal plant species identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) Some groups listed more than others); 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages. Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Important plant species

listed byStudy villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Fau Beach hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceus 3 2 2 3 10Futu Fish-poison tree Barringtonia asiatica 3 2 2 3 10Niu Coconut Cocos nucifera 3 2 2 3 10Milo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populnea 3 2 2 2 9Talie Tropical almond Terminalia samoensis

Terminalia catappa2 2 2 3 9

Fetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllum 1 2 2 3 8Pu’a Chinese-lantern tree Hernandia

nymphaeifolia2 2 3 7

Leva Cerbera Cerbera manghas 2 1 2 5Gatae Coral tree Erythrina variegata 1 1 2 1 5Ifi Tahitian chestnut Inocarpus fagifer 1 1 2 4Fu’afu’a Guest tree Kleinhovia hospita 2 1 1 2 4Fao Neisosperma Neisosperma

oppositifolium1 1 1 3

Togo Oriental mangrove or Red mangrove

Bruguiera gymnorrhizaRhizophora mangle

2 2

Pulu Indian banyan? Ficus benghalensis 2 2Pualulu Pua Fagraea berteroana 1 1 2Ifilele Intsia bijuga 1 1 2 Tausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argentea 1 1 Mati Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabra 1 1Pu’a vai Pisonia Pisonia grandis 1 1Lama Candlenut Aleurites moluccana 1 1Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium

umbellatum3 2 1 3 9

Nonu Indian mulberry Morinda citrifolia 2 1 1 2 6Fisoa Colubrina asiatica 2 1 2 5Fasa/laufala Screwpine Pandanus tectorius 2 1 1 1 5Ti Ti plant Cordyline fruticosa 1 1 1 1 4Aloalo tai/suniatai Beach privet Clerodendrum inerme 1 1 1 3Ateate Beach sunflower Wollastonia biflora 2 1 3Paogo Pandanus Pandanus turritus 1 1 2Laau failafa Candlebush Senna alata 1 1 2Aloalo Premma Premna serratifolia 1 1 Gau Island myrtle Alyxia stellata 1 1Laumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australis 1 1 Namulega Beach vitex Vitex trifolia 1 1Masame Glochidion ramiflorum 1 1Vines/Weeds Fue sina Beach pea Vigna marina 3 1 1 3 8Fue moa Beach morning glory Ipomoea pes-caprae 2 1 1 2 6Tifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloides 1 1

89

Togotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiatica 1 1Ferns Lau auta Scented fern Phymatosorus grossus 1 1

The survey results (Table 4.2) show that there are some 19 coastal trees, 14 shrubs and a few vines and ferns listed as amongst the most important according to the respondents. The main common coastal trees in these four villages include the beach hibiscus (fau); fish poison tree (futu); coconut (niu); Pacific rosewood (milo); tropical almond (talie); Alexandrian laurel (fetau);coral tree (gatae) and the guest tree (fu’afu’a). Other important species include the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a); Cerbera manghas (leva); Tahitian chestnut (ifi); Neisosperma oppositifolium(fao); mangroves (togo); Fagraea berteroana (pualulu); dyer’s fig (mati); tree heliotrope (tausuni); pisonia (pu’a vai); candlenut (lama); Intsia bijuga (ifilele) and the Ficus benghalensis(pulu), which is found only at Ma’asina.

Shrubs listed are Dendrolobium (lala); Indian mulberry (nonu); Colubrina asiatica (fisoa);screwpine (fasa); ti plant (ti); Clerodendrum inerme (aloalo tai); beach sunflower (ateate);candlebush (la’au failafa) and others as named by separate villages and groups. The beach pea (fue sina) and the beach morning glory (fue moa) were the widespread vines stated and only the Phymatosorus grossus (lau auta) was named within the fern group species.

Out of the four study villages a mangrove community exists only at Ta’elefaga at the western estuary (Figure 4.10). The two types of mangroves found there are the Bruguiera gymnorrhizaand the Rhizophora mangle (both togo).

90

Figure. 4.10:Mangrovecommunity on the west end ofTa'elefaga Village

Figure 4.10 shows the togo forest, the source area of mangrove crabs (pa’alimago) and the venus clam (tugane). A family living next to the mangrove community has a fixed gillnet at the mouth of the mangrove estuary to catch mangrove crabs.

At Gagaifo Village, a fresh-water swamp exists at the eastern end of the village where the vegetation is dominated by screwpine, Pandanus tectorius (fasa), Cyclosorus interruptus (vao tuaniu) and some other ferns (Figure 4.11). Similar plant species exist in swampy areas at Vailele with an abundance of candlebush (la’au failafa) mixed with screwpine.

Figure 4.11:Swampat Gagaifo Village

91

Other common plants found in these swamps are beach hibiscus (fau), guest tree (fu’afu’a) and Tahitian chestnut (ifi) at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo. The swamps at Gagaifo and Vailele and mangroves at Ta’elefaga have been greatly disturbed by people for settlement, firewood gathering, and waste disposal as well as damaged by animals like pigs and cows, as seen at Ta’elefaga.

Small plantations of coconut palms and banana patches exist along the shores of Vailele and Ma’asina. The vegetation on the shores of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga is scattered with few littoral species remaining next to the sea. Deliberately planted tropical almonds (talie) and coconuts aremixed with coastal plants in these four villages.

Springs on shores still provide brackish and fresh water at Vailele and Gagaifo. The coastal people at Gagaifo, which have limited access to tap water, depend on the brackish spring water (during low tide) on their shore for daily washing and bathing (Figures 4.12a and 4.12b).

Figure 4.12a: Spring water pool at Vailele providing Figure 4.12b Brackish water available at low tide at the fresh water for cooking, washing and bathing coast of Gagaifo use for bathing and washing

The questionnaire surveys and interviews showed that the male groups were most familiar with trees and shrubs they frequently use for domestic and social needs such as building, carving or firewood. Many traditional healers (taulasea) are women and thus have familiarity with the plants they use for treating illnesses, many of which are for children’s ailments, that use a variety of trees and shrubs as well as vines and creepers (Table 4.3).

92

Table 4.3: List of plant species with medicinal uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (NB: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) Some groups listed more than others); 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan/Common Names

Scientific Name Medicinal Uses Important plant species Listed by Study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Milo/Pacific rosewood

Thespesia populnea women post-birth sickness (failele gau), children’s ailments, stomach ache, eyes

3 2 2 2 9

Talie/ Tropical almond

Terminalia spp. children’s ailments, eye problems

2 2 2 3 9

Fau/ Beach hibiscus

Hibiscus tiliaceus children’s ailments, injuries, asthma, diarrhoea, urinary problems

3 1 2 2 8

Niu/Coconut Cocos nucifera root for injuries, nut/husk – children’s ailments

3 1 2 2 8

Fetau/Alexandrianlaurel

Calophylluminophyllum

diarrhoea, eye problems 1 1 2 2 6

Pu’a/ Chinese-lantern tree

Hernandianymphaeifolia

women post-birth remedy (failele gau), diarrhea

1 2 3 6

Futu/Fishpoison tree

Barringtonia asiatica skin sickness/rash, children’s ailments

2 1 2 5

Fu’afu’a/Guesttree

Kleinhovia hospita Injuries 1 1 1 2 5

Leva Cerbera manghas skin problems and sores 1 1 1 1 4Mati/Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabra burns, eye problems 1 1 Lama/ Candle-nut

Aleurites moluccana skin rashes, fungus & sores 1 1

Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium

Umbellatumburns, asthma?, children’s ailments

3 3 6

Nonu/ Indian mulberry

Morinda citrifolia massage headaches, boils, inflammation (m m ),remedy for eye pimple, asthma etc.

2 1 1 2 6

Fisoa Colubrina asiatica flu, women post-birth sickness (failelegau)

2 2 4

Ti Cordyline fruticosa massage of headaches,inflammations (m m )

1 1 1 1 4

Aloalotai/suniatai

Clerodendruminerme

post-birth sickness, inflammation (m m ),children’s ailments (ila)

1 1 1 3

Ateate/ Beach sunflower

Wollastonia biflora injuries, inflammation (m m ), women post-birth illness

2 1 3

La’au failafa/ Candlebush

Senna alata ringworm 1 1 2

93

Aloalo Premna serratifolia children’s ailments (m m ) 1 1Laumafiafia/Wax plant

Hoya australis children’s sickness (m m ) 1 1

Namulega Vitex trifolia asthma 1 1Masame Glochidion

ramiflorummouth sores 1 1

Vines Fue sina/ Beach pea

Vigna marina children’s ailments, injuries, postbirth sickness, tooth aches, cure supernatural sickness (saua)

3 1 1 3 8

Fue moa/ Beach morning glory

Ipomoea pes-caprae eye ointment, children sickness (m m ), women post-birth illnesses, urinary illness

2 1 1 2 6

Togo/Asiaticpennywort

Centella asiatica burn, supernatural caused diseases (saua)

1 1

Ferns Lau auta Phymatosorus

grossuschildren’s ailments (m m ,ila), women post birth illnesses,

1 1

The plants most commonly listed as important and widely use for Samoan healing (f f ) included Pacific rosewood (milo), tropical almond (talie), beach hibiscus (fau), coconut (niu), vines like the beach morning glory (fue sina), beach pea (fue moa) and shrubs like the wax plant (laumafiafia), aloalo and aloalo tai for children remedies. Common ailments include those that affect infants such as fever, skin inflammations (m m ) and ila, as well as illness affecting women after giving birth (failele gau).

The uses of coastal plants also included commercial earnings from carvings, handicraft tools and other households needs (Table 4.4).

94

Table 4.4: List of plant uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan/Common Names

Scientific Name Uses: F-food; H/C-handicraft & Carving; T-tools; O- others; P –Poison; D- Domestic (building, ropes, woven thatches/blinds etc), firewood

Important plant species listed by Study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total Que.

X/10

Total UseofPlnt

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X10

Tot use

Niu/Coconut Cocos nucifera F- meat for cream etc, juice, pig feed; H/C– decorations/ traditional wear fashions, souvenirs;D – buildings/posts/floor, sinnet, thatches/ blinds/weaving etc.

33

3

21

2

21

2

33

3

108

10 28

Fau/ Beach hibiscus

Hibiscus tiliaceus T- fishing tool; H/C- bowls, cricket bats, boats, wooden drums (p t ),laces, decorations etc; D- building, ropes (tying)

33

3

12

2

12

1

13

2

610

6 24Talie/ Tropical almond

Terminalia spp. F- seed eaten by children H/C- bowls (kava/food), paddlesO- wind/wave breaker/ protectionD- dye use in mats, firewood

1

2

2211

2211

3222

8646 24

Futu/Fishpoison tree

Barringtoniaasiatica

H/C- statues, souvenirs, fine mats cover when cleanse; P– fish poison O- fix leaks of canoes

1

3

1

2

1

21

1

3

4

101 15

Fetau/Alexandrianlaurel

Calophylluminophyllum

H/C- laces, paddles etcO- washing fine mats

1 2 21

2 71

8Pu’a/ Chinese-lantern tree

Hernandianymphaeifolia

H/C- laces, wood drums (p t )

2 2 3 78

Ifi/Tahitianchestnut

Inocarpus fagifer F- food; D- firewood O- wind/wave breaker protection

1 11

21

1 52 7

Fu’afu’a/Guesttree

Kleinhovia hospita D - stick to carry loads (amo), firewood

3 1 1 2 77

Milo/Pacific rosewood

Thespesiapopulnea

H- small wood souvenirs, bowls (kava, food); T- handle of fishing spear

1 1 2

1

1 5

1 6Leva Cerbera manghas H/C – decorations 1 1 1 1 4 4Gatae/Coraltree

Erythrina variegata O – hedges/posts; cattle feed

1 1 1 1 4 4

Fao Neisospermaoppositifolium

F– seed eaten by children;D – firewood

1 1 1 33

Ifilele Intsia bijuga C- Carving handicrafts 1 2 3

95

Togo/Orientalmangrove/Redmangrove

Bruguieragymnorrhiza/Rhizophoramangle

O- dye (mats), fish nursery, wind/wave breaker protection

2 2

2Pulu/Indianbanyan?

Ficusbenghalensis

O- waves/wind breaker D – firewood

2 2 2

Pualulu Fagraeaberteroana

H/C - decoration (scent) 1 1 2 2

Tausuni/Treeheliotrope

Tournefortiaargentea

D- hard wood as posts e.g. for hanging washing etc

1 11

Pu’a vai Pisonia grandis H-handicrafts/lacesD - firewood

1 1 1

Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium O- cover fish; T- poles for

fish nets/fences; D– firewood 2 2 1 1 6

6Fisoa Colubrina asiatica D-soap (used in olden days), 2 1 2 5 5Fasa/screw- pine

Pandanustectorius

H/C- laces (seeds/fruit) T- eel traps’ signals

2 1 11

41 5

Paogo Pandanusturritus/whitmeeau

D- weaving various types of mats, fans etc

1 1 22

Gau Alyxia stellata H/C- laces (bark) 1 1 1Vines/weeds Tifa/St.Thomas bean

Entadaphaseoloides

H/C- seeds for laces 1 1 1

As would be expected, the coconut is the most widely used and important tree that caters for a diversity of household needs, consumption and medicine. The villages have planted coconuts (niu) and tropical almonds (talie) for coastal protection from erosion (Figures 4.13a and 4.13.b). A range of species was also planted as ornamentals and as living fences or hedges for example the coral tree (gatae) that is commonly grown as a living fence.

Figure 4.13a: Planting coconut for coastal protection at Figure 4.13b: Tropical almond and coconut the east end of Gagaifo tress along the shore of Ma’asina

Wood carving, for example of wooden bowls for kava and food, cricket bats, paddles and some handicrafts, was practised only at the villages of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina using beach hibiscus

96

(fau), fish poison tree (futu), Pacific rosewood (milo), pisonia (pu’a vai) and ifilele. However, nowadays these activities are not often practised compared to previous years. Most of the coastal plants listed are still present in a scattered pattern in the case study areas, with a few species having declined in abundance in recent years (Table 4.5).

Table 4.5: Perception that specified coastal plant species known and listed have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004. Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Coastal plantsDeclined (d), Rare (r) & Depleted (dp) X/10

Total

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Pu’a Chinese lantern tree Hernandia nymphaeifolia 1d 1d 2Fetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllum 1d 1d 2 Milo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populnea 1d 1d 2Ifilele Intsia bijuga 1r 1r 2 Leva Cerbera manghas 1d 1Futu Fish poison tree Barringtonia asiatica 1d 1Tausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argentea 1d 1 ShrubsAteate Beach sunflower Wollastonia biflora 1r 1d 2 Aloalotai Clerodendrum inerme 1d 1Laumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australis 1r 1 Vines/weedsTogotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiatica 1r 1Tifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloides 1r 1

Low plants tend to disappear easily, compared to trees due to their lowland spread and vulnerability to tropical cyclones that cause coastal erosion at the study villages. Main examples are the shrubs and vines that have become rare, such as the beach sunflower (ateate) and Asiatic pennywort (togotogo) at Gagaifo, wax plant (laumafiafia) at Vailele and St. Thomas bean (tifa) at Ma’asina, some of which are among the most important medicinal plants.

Some other species, that have declined include the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a), Alexandrian laurel (fetau) at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo as well as the Pacific rosewood (milo) at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The Intsia bijuga (ifilele) was common at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in previous years; however, this plant is now rare due to cutting down for carving handicrafts. According to some respondents the current scarcity of ifilele may have caused the reduction in carving activities at

97

these villages nowadays. When ifilele declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina some carvers used to cut ifilele from Uafato but this activity has been banned by Uafato Village. Clearing for road construction has led to the loss of some of these plants from Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. Also these plants were destroyed by tropical cyclones at the sites particularly Gagaifo and Vailele.

4.7 INFRA-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACTS

Coastal plants that protect the beaches and the coast of villages have been destroyed by settlement and cyclones in the past years. Villagers living near shores have altered the coastlines and have tried to protect these areas from wave action by building boulder or rubble seawalls, as seen at Ta’elefaga (Figure 4.14a) and Vailele (Figure 4.14b).

Figure 4.14a: Rock seawall for coastal protection from Figure 4.14b: A coral rubble seawall built by a wave erosion at Ta’elefaga River mouth family at Vailele

Families at Ta’elefaga collect pebbles and stones from the Ta’elefaga River mouth for building a coastal seawall and for other domestic uses like house foundations.

At Vailele people use coral rubble that has been blown onto the reef and shore by cyclones to protect sand from wave erosion, however sand still erodes even with these efforts to prevent it. Previous cyclones in 1990 and 1991 eroded much of these research areas’ coasts causing individual families to build their own boulder/rubble seawalls and to plant trees, mainly tropical almond (talie) and coconut palms (niu).

The Afulilo Reservoir (Figure 4.6) is located on an area that used to be a large native swamp forest known as the Punataemo’o and the Vaipu Basin that were connected by the Afulilo

98

waterfall. Pearsall and Whistler (1991) gave this site top priority ranking amongst ecosystems needing concerted conservation efforts should the damming occur. This hydro electricity dam, which began operation in 1993, has caused many environmental problems that the rural people of Fagaloa could not have foreseen at the time of construction.

The water from the Afulilo Reservoir is diverted through a tunnel to Ta’elefaga Village, where the power station is located, and discharged as wastewater from the power station into the Ta’elefaga River causing the murky and discoloured lagoon (Figures 4.15a and 4.15b).

The continuous rapid flow of the Ta’elefaga River increases the runoff of pebbles and soil towards the coast. The increased velocity of the river poses danger and discomfort to the villagers, who complained of noise pollution and discolored water that ends up in the lagoon. In dry periods the dropping of the water level of the Afulilo Reservoir to near dry point creates an unpleasant swampy smell in the water that ended up at Ta’elefaga.

Figures 4.15a and 4.15b: Discoloured lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village due to wastewater from the hydroelectric power station

The power station reportedly endangers the marine life of Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa Bay due to increased sedimentation with the continuous rapid flow of Ta’elefaga stream. As a result the lagoon is always murky brown (Figures 4.15a and 4.15b) and unsuitable for fishing activities. The Ta’elefaga River that the discharges wastewater from the hydro-electricity power station overflows mainly in the wet season.

99

At Gagaifo Village another tar sealed road was built about 300-400 metres from the coast when the road next to the sea was damaged after the cyclones in 1990 and 1991. Parts of the village’s coconut plantations near the coast have been felled for the building of this road and some of the families relocated there.

The study villages are experiencing coastal erosion. The roads at Fagaloa and at Gagaifo are next to the sea and they were destroyed and eroded by cyclones Ofa and Val in 1990 and 1991. The erosion of the coasts of these villages, which have limited flat land such as Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, is a current concern (Figures 4.16 a–d).

Figures 4.16 a–d: Coastal erosion along the shores of the study villages

a) Gagaifo: The coast and road being eroded b) Ta'elefaga: Mangrove estuary and coastal road

d) Ta'elefaga: Less coastal plants & road next to sea c) Vailele: Coral rubble to protect sand from eroding

100

4.8 OTHER COASTAL IMPACTS: AGRICULTURE, LITTER AND SAND MINING

Shifting plantation and agriculture at Gagaifo and Vailele are concentrated in inland forest areas and have little impact on coastal areas and marine life, compared to the more substantial impacts at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Fagaloa Bay is surrounded by steep mountains and lacks flat land for farms and plantations. In the wet season rapid runoff occurs especially at Ta’elefaga where the main road cut through the mountains behind this village. Increased runoff from uplands and rivers with discharged wastewater from the power station accelerates sedimentation. These have contributed to coastal and nearshore problems in Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa as a whole.

Household waste disposal was seen but not considered a serious concern in the study villages as compared to the urban areas. However, the accumulation of non-degradable and plastic materials is increasing at rural villages. At Gagaifo plastics and tins are discarded in the coastal zone behind the committee house that is used for village functions. Metals and rusty iron roofs were seen at the coast of Ta’elefaga and broken bottles and plastics at some areas of Ma’asina and Vailele coasts.

Villagers still practice sand mining, particularly in Vailele and Gagaifo, where there are white sandy beaches (Figure 4.17a and Figure 4.17b).

Figure 4.17a: Children at Vailele extracting sand for Figure 4.17b: Sand mining at Gagaifo forbeautification of house surroundings construction purposes

People mine sand for beautification of their surroundings and for mixing cement for building houses. But this activity is carried out on only a minor scale and does not seem to be a significant threat to the ecological balance of these coastal areas.

101

CHAPTER FIVE NEARSHORE MARINE BIODIVERSITY OF THE STUDY VILLAGES

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter first discusses the marine environment and biodiversity, the abundance and how the villages use these resources (5.2 – 5.10). The second part (5.11) explains the impacts of people and natural disasters on fisheries and other marine species and then identifies management efforts (5.12) in the study villages.

5.2 FISHERIES FOR SURVIVAL AND FISHING ACTIVITIES

Artisanal (small-scale commercial fishing with surplus for consumption) and subsistence (for family consumption) fishing in relation to this research are the main fishing activities that provide for the local villagers’ protein needs. Finfish and other seafood are the main source of protein and essential for special occasions in all villages. The results of the household surveys (Figures 5.1a) in the study villages showed the importance of marine resources in the local diet. This was particularly significant at Vailele Village, which consumes a wider variety of seafood apart from finfish compared with Gagaifo, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

Seafood consum ption per w eek at the four case study areas

19%

42%33%

6%once/w k2 days/w kthree days/w kfour days/w k

Figure 5.1a: Consumption per week in households at the four study villages

Figure 5.1a illustrates the total consumption of marine species per week, showing that about 39% of households consume finfish and other various seafood types three to four times per week. For example at Vailele, in addition to finfishes many families also consume a wide range of marine

102

invertebrates such as sea hares, sea cucumbers, pen shells and sea urchins twice or three times a week. A further 42% of the households in the four villages consume seafood twice a week and about 19% eat seafood at least once a week.

The results of the household interviews were supported by the creel surveys, which recorded fishers’ catches on the spot (Figure 5.1b).

Figure 5.1b: Uses of Fishers' uses of catch

49%

16%

19%

15% 1%

eat sell eat & sell eat & for function/occasion bait (eel traps)

fishers’ catches in the study villages

The fishers’ creel surveys in figure 5.1b showed that 49% fished solely for their families’ consumption, 9% fished for selling with surplus from the catches to be eaten, 15% was to use catches for special functions like meetings, food for teachers of the local school or for visitors (Figure 5.2a and 5.2b).

Figures 5.2a: Cooked crab (pa'a), moray eels (fai'ai pusi) Figure 5.2b Cooked large finfish and lobster for and bottle of sea cucumber/gonads (fugafuga, sea) visitor’s meal

103

The fishers’ creel survey show similar results to the household interviews in figure 5.1a and the total estimate of catches for consumption range from 50 to 65%. Even though this reflects the significance on fishing and of seafood, many households at Fagaloa and Gagaifo consumed finfish purchased from shops or the fish market in Apia or from fishers within their own village.

Many people at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina do not fish as often nowadays as they used to, reportedly because their impoverished lagoons now lack many marine species they used to depend on in previous years. Those that fished in the daytime are mainly fishers using gill and cast nets. Spear diving is often carried out at nighttime at Gagaifo and a few fishers at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina that fish near and beyond the reef where the lagoon is less murky.

Fishing activities illustrated in Table 5.1 shows that females gathering sea cucumbers, sea urchins, sea hares and shellfishes did many of the fishing activities at Vailele. Fishers at Gagaifo were predominantly males that carried out spearing and diving, particularly at nighttime.

Table 5.1: Number of creel surveys/catches inventories during fieldwork in four study villages in Samoa from July to August 2004

Fishers’ village Males Females Total Research time (wks) Vailele 18 26 44 1½ weeks Gagaifo 39 5 41 2½ weeks Ta’elefaga 16 1 17 1 week Ma’asina 4 2 6 1 week Total 74 34 108 6 weeks

During the six weeks fieldwork the total number of fishers’ catches recorded was 108 in the four villages. Of the total of 34 women fishers, 26 were recorded at Vailele and 5 in Gagaifo. In the two weeks of the research at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina only three females went fishing to gather Asaphis shellfish (pipi). Most of the fishers recorded at Gagaifo were mainly the night diving and spearing males and a few of them fishing in the daytime using gill and cast nets.

5.3 CORALS AND REEFS

Research in 1996 by Green included a site at Lefaga and one at Fagaloa Bay but not exactly in Ta’elefaga or Ma’asina (Fagaloa) or Gagaifo (Lefaga). The sites used in the 1996 research were located at the reef fronts and the result showed the healthy condition of the reef fronts of Fagaloa

104

and Lefaga. This healthy coral condition of Fagaloa was due to the site’s location outside/beyond the reef, where they are bathed in clear oceanic waters, while the inshore lagoon is more subjected to poor water quality.

The villagers have less knowledge of specific coral names than fish names but they have identified some of the common stony corals present (Table 5.2).

Table 5.2: Frequency that specified species of corals found and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Some groups listed more than; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Corals identified by fishers from the study villages–Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Stony corals Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 x/10

Amu’amu/feofeo? Staghorn coral Acropora spp. (branching) 3 2 2 2 9 Tu/Puga Massive coral Porites spp. 3 1 2 2 8Lapa Plate coral Acropora (tabulate) 3 2 1 2 8Punau Stinging/fire coral MilleporaAmu ula Red coral Stylaster

Pavona cactus? 2? Solitary corals Fungia? 2 1Blue coral? 2

Soft corals Alcyonaria 2 1 Amu galemulemu Sarcophyton

trochiliophorum?

In Table 5.2 the fishers identified the massive corals and staghorn corals like the Porites (tu) and Acropora as being found at study sites. Gagaifo with fringing reefs and corals that covered much of its lagoon had a greater diversity of stony corals compared to Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.Healthy soft corals were observed by snorkelling at Gagaifo Village, like the two types in Figure 5.3a.

Figure 5.3a: Soft coralsat Gagaifo

105

Soft corals in Figure 5.3a are mainly scattered in the middle lagoon near the shore of Gagaifo, an area that used to be the village’s reserve area under the Samoa Fishing Project. Corals are quite healthy in this area and on the west end of the lagoon (Figure 5.3b). On the east end dead corals were witnessed. This was reportedly a result of heavy use of Derris mallaccensis (ava niukini),a source of rotenone, as a fish poison up until the early 1990s, though corals are now regenerating (Figure 5.3c).

Figure 5.3b: Healthy plate corals at Gagaifo Figure 5.3c: Regenerating corals at Gagaifo

The crown-of-thorns starfish was also problematic in the 1980s to early 1990s and contributed to the dying of corals. The other common coral problem at Gagaifo is coral breakage due to fishing methods used for example some families gather sea anemones for commercial purposes.

Corals in the lagoon of Vailele are healthy but often overturned by fishers collecting sea urchins, sea cucumbers, shellfish and other marine species. Reefs exist at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga though the latter are not well developed opposite the perennial Ta’elefaga River where water from the power station is discharged.

Corals in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga are degraded and are dying due to sedimentation from upland runoff, as illustrated by the poor condition seen in Figure 5.4a and 5.4b. Sediments deposited on tops of Porites thus hinder the upward growth of the corals, though the sides are still living (Figure 5.4b).

106

Figure 5.4a: Degraded corals at Ta’elefaga Figure 5.4b: Dead tops of Porites at Ta’elefaga

Figures 5.4a and 5.4b illustrate dying stony corals in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga and about five soft white corals were seen (by snorkelling) in this lagoon as well, which will totally disappear soon with the current situation of sedimentation.

5.4 LARGE NEARSHORE FINFISHES

Large and small finfishes are essential for consumption, special occasions and earning income in villages. However, nowadays frozen and canned meat is replacing finfish in many traditional occasions such as corned beef, mutton flaps and mainly tinned fish that is becoming more prominent in daily family meals.

The group questionnaires discussion in the four villages listed about 30 different large nearshore finfishes and at least 20 family/groups of similar species are considered to be very important in their villages (Table 5.3). All of these species are reported as being sold commercially and eaten as part of subsistence consumption in all study villages. Some fish Samoan names encompass more than one species and some species have more than one Samoan name such as the goatfish (vete, afulu, matulau, i'asina) and others vary depending on their different sizes, for example mullet – ua (juvenile), fuafua (medium) and anae (large sized).

107

Table 5.3: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were listed as being among the 20 most significant, in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups were not able to list 20 species and some listed more 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Large near shore finfish present at study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Anae Mullet Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscusMugil cephalus

3 2 2 3 10

Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinusamboinensis/olivaceus

3 2 2 3 10

Laea Parrotfish Scarus spp. 3 2 2 3 10SapoanaeMalauli/Ulua

Trevallies Caranx spp.,Uraspis secundaCarangoides spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Ume Unicornfish Naso spp. 3 2 2 3 10Galo H/Parrotfish Scarus gibbus?? 2 1 2 2 7Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp. 2 1 2 1 6Mat mu/Mu matavaivai

Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculus 1 2 2 0 5

Malatea/Tagafa

Humphead maori wrasse

Cheilinus undulates 2 1 1 1 5

Palani >15cm Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 2 1 1 1 5Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicus 2 1 1 1 5Ulapo Parrotfish Hipposcarus longiceps 2 0 1 2 5Ata’ata

Gatala moana

Grouper Coral trout P/grouper

Epinephelus septemfasciatusPlectropomus leopardusCephalopholis argus

1 1 1 1 4

Taiva Onespot Snapper Lutjanus monostigma 1 1 1 1 4Mala’i Humpback snapper Lutjanus gibbus 1 1 0 2 4Malava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteus 3 1 0 1 5A’u/Ise Long-tom Platybelone argalus platyura 0 1 2 1 4Mu Twinspot red snapper Lutjanus bohar 0 1 1 1 3Ganue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp. 0 1 1 1 3Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatus 2 0 0 1 3Sumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistes flavimarginatus 0 1 0 2 3Saosao Great barracuda Agrioposphyraena barracuda 0 1 1 0 2Ava Milkfish Chanos chanos 1 0 1 0 2Ali Flounder Samariscus triocellatus 0 1 0 1 2Filoa-muFiloa

Emperors Gymnocranius spp.Lethrinus spp.

0 0 0 1 1

Moana Goatfish Parupeneus spp. 1 0 0 0 1Sapat Barracudas Sphyraena spp. 1 0 0 0 1Papa Lunartail Cod Variola louti 0 0 1 0 1Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1 0 0 0 1Patagaloa Surge wrasse Thalassoma purpureum 1 0 0 0 1

108

The most important large finfish species mentioned by at least half of the survey groups include mullets (anae), ambon emperor (filoa) and other emperors (mat mu, filoamu), parrotfish (laea,galo, ulapo), trevallies (malauli, ulua), unicornfish (ume), pompano/dart (l l futu), goatfish (ta’ulaia, moana), surgeonfish (palani), humphead maori wrasse (malatea, tagafa) and surge wrasse (patagaloa). Other important species or groups of species included a range of groupers or rock cods (ata’ata), snappers (mala’i, mu, taiva), rudderfish (ganue), long tom (a’u),rabbitfish (malava), barracudas (saosao, sapat ), moonfish (koko), flounder (ali) and triggerfish (sumulaulau).

During the fieldwork some important large finfishes (Figures 5.5a–e) that were seen and caught nearshore by fishers and observed by snorkelling include the mullet (anae) and some parrotfishes (laea) in all villages. The unicornfish were caught at Ta’elefaga and Vailele from offshore diving and spearing. The trevallies (malauli) were seen at Vailele lagoon at high tide and fishers at these villages caught none while moonfish (koko) were caught at Gagaifo using gillnets. Filefish (ume aleva) were captured at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga and a long tom (a’u) was caught at Ma’asina by fishers using gillnets.

Figures 5.5a–e: Some important large finfishes caught at the study villages during the time of the fieldwork

5.4.1 Abundance of large near shore finfish

a)Gagaifo: b) Ta’elefaga: c) Ma’asina: filefish - ume aleva unicornfish - ume longtom - a’u

e) Ta’elefaga: gill net catch of mullets, emperors, parrotfish – anae, filoa, fuga

d) Gagaifo: moonfish and mullets caught using gill nets - koko, anae

109

5.4.1 Abundance of Large Nearshore Finfishes

Most of the large finfishes listed (Table 5.3) are still found and are not considered rare, although their numbers have declined. Fishers nowadays find it difficult to fish large finfishes and it takes longer hours to fish in order to get a good catch. The sizes of large finfishes have gone smaller now as compared to previous years. As a result of less quantity and smaller sizes, the cost of finfish has increased dramatically.

The large finfishes still in good supply at the four areas of study are the onespot snapper (taiva),the dot-tail goatfish (ta’ulaia) and mullet (anae) that are caught in the lagoon and near the reefs, mostly by fishers using gill nets. However, according to fishers of Ta’elefaga Village, the dot-tail goatfish (ta’ulaia) that used to be caught along the shore at night with methods like spearing can now be caught only by diving and spear fishing near the reef or outside the reef.

Many finfish, shellfish and invertebrates have now avoided or have disappeared from the discoloured dirty waters of Ta’elefaga’s inshore lagoon. Most of the large finfishes that used to be found in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga in previous years are now uncommon and can be found only near or beyond the reef.

The other large finfishes such as grouper (ata’ata); rudderfish (ganue); humphead snapper (mala’i); twinspot red snapper (mu); surgeonfish (palani) and parrotfish (ulapo) are still found even though in limited supply. However, they have declined in the lagoon and even beyond the reef where they used to be in good supply. Many reasons affect the quantity of large finfish, leading to the decline of some species that have now become rare or depleted within the villages of Gagaifo, Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga (Table 5.4).

110

Table 5.4: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Other groups listed more than others 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Large finfish abundance Rare (r), declining(d) & depleted(dp)

Total

Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Malatea/Tagafa Humphead maori wrasse

Cheilinus undulates 2r 1r 1r 1d 5

Galo Steephead parrotfish Chlorurous microrrhinus 1r 1d 1r1dp

1 5

Sapoanae G-trevally Caranx ignobilis 1d 1d 1d 2Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinus amboinensis 1r 1Laea Parrotfish Scarus spp. 1d 1 Palani Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 1d 1 Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicus 1d Ume Unicornfish Naso spp. 1r 1Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp. 1r 1Matamu Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculus 1d 1Malava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteus 1r 1A’u/Ise Long tom Platybelone argalus

platyura1d 1

Sumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistesflavimarginatus

1d 1

Fugamea Parrotfish Scaridae 1d Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1d 1

The fish reported by respondents to be increasingly rare or depleted at their villages include the steephead parrotfish, Chlorurous microrrhinus (galo) and humphead maori wrasse Cheilinusundulatus (malatea) as the most vulnerable. At Gagaifo and Vailele, these fish are rare in the lagoon except beyond the reef that fishers stated these fishes are found but in declining numbers compared to the last 30 years. The fishers of Ta’elefaga stated that these fishes are now absent from their lagoon and rare offshore where they could be found if they fish for long hours at night.

Other large finfish that are declining include the trevally, Caranx ignobilis (sapo’anae/malauli),long tom, Platybelone argalus platyura (a’u) and rabbitfish, Siganus argenteus (malava). These are also rare both inshore and beyond the reef especially at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

111

At Vailele there is a decline of species like the ambon emperor, (filoa); other species of parrotfishes (laea); the reddish parrotfishes (fugamea); the surgeonfish Acanthurus bleekeri(palani) and the triggerfish, Pseudobalistes flavimarginatus (sumulaulau).Some species that have declined and become rare in Gagaifo include the pompana, (lalafutu);bigeye emperor, Monotaxis grandoculus (mat mu); unicornfish, Naso unicornis (ume) and the filefish (ume aleva).

5.5 SMALL NEARSHORE FINFISHES

The inshore lagoon is the most important fishing ground in Samoa where most fishing activities take place. Traditionally, small finfish found in the lagoon provides the daily basic protein for consumption in Samoan families.

Fishing nowadays is hard work according to many people, because it takes much longer hours to fish because of the declining numbers of small finfish. For many people now, especially those at Gagaifo, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, it is easy and cheaper to buy tinned fish.

Although most of the small finfish are still found in these villages (Table 5.5) the supply is not the same as it was in the past. Even those in good supply, have been decreasing in numbers and size.

Table 5.5: Frequency with which specified small finfishes were listed as being among the 20 most significant, nearshore species in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) some groups were not able to list 20 species and some listed more; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Small finfish present at Study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Alogo Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Manini Convict

surgeonfishAcanthurus triostegus 3 2 2 3 10

Pone <15cm Pala’ia-juveniles

Bristle-toothedsurgeonfish

Ctenochaetus striatus 3 2 2 3 10

Fuga Parrotfish Scarus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Gatala Groupers/cod Epinephelus spp. 3 2 2 3 10

112

Pa’u’ulu/kiko/Lo Rabbitfishes Siganus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Malau/tamalau Squirrelfishes

Soldierfishes

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Tifitifi

Alosina

Butterfly fishes Chaetodon spp.Forcipiger spp.Hemitaurichthys polylepisHeniochus spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Tu’u’u

Tu’u’u/MamoMutu

Gregories

DamselfishesSergeant-majors Pullers

Pygoplites diacanthusPomacanthus imperatorAbudefdul spp.Amblyglyphidodon leucogasterStegastes spp.Chromis spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Mata’ele’ele Emperors Lethrinus spp. 2 2 2 3 9Lupo <8cm Jacks Carangidae

Seriola rivolianaScomberoidescommersonianus

2 1 2 3 8

Aua 8-12cm Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

2 2 2 2 8

Vete/I’asinaMatulau/AfuluUla’oa

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

3 1

1

2 7

Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 1 2 1 2 6Atule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus

Decapterus spp.1 2 2 1 6

Matala’oa/Taiva Mala’i/Tamala

Black snapper Snappers

Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

1 1 1 3 6

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

2 2 1 1 6

Lalafi Maori wrasse Cheilinus spp. 1 1 0 2 4Ili’ilia <15cm Unicornfish Naso lituatus 2 0 0 2 4Pa’umal Filefishes Amanses spp. 1 0 0 3 4Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthysquadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

1 1 1 1 4

Sal Samoan anchovy Stolephorus apiensis 1 1 1 1 4Pinel (juveniles) Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 2 1 1 0 4Sugale Wrass Halichoeres hartzfeldii

Hemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.

2 0 0 1 3

113

Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodon meleagris

Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus anguillaris 0 1 1 1 3Gatala Groupers/Cods Cephalopholis spp.

Plectropomus leopardus2 0 0 1 3

Sue Puffers/Tobies Canthigaster spp.Arothron spp.

0 2 0 1 3

Tautu Porcupinefish Diodon spp. 0 1 1 1 3Ava’ava Terapon perch Terapon jarbua 1 0 0 1 2Tolo Flatheads Platycephalidae (5spp.) 2 0 0 0 2NofuSausauleleLa’otele

ScorpionfishLionfishReef stonefish

Scorpaenopsis cirrhosaPterois volitansSynanceia verrucosa

1 1 0 0 2

Mumu Ponyfishes

Goldline bream

Leiognathus spp.Gazza minutaGnathodentex aureolineatus

0 1 1 0 2

Igaga? 0 0 2 0 2Tivao

Tivao-sugale

Monocle bream Butterfly bream Whiptail

Scolopsis trilineatusNemipterus sp.Pentapodus sp.

0 0 0 1 1

Moamoa Trunkfishes/Boxfishes

Lactoria cornutaOstracion tuberculatumOstracium lentiginosum

0 1 0 0 1

Maogo White-spottedsurgeonfish

Acanthurus guttatus 1 0 0 0 1

Groups of men and women fishers in the four villages identified at least 32 species or groups of small finfishes that are amongst the most significant and common in their lagoon. The most significant small finfish for selling and subsistence consumption include the surgeonfishes (alogo,pone, manini), groupers/cods (gatala), small parrotfish (fuga), rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo/kiko),squirrelfish and soldierfish (malau/tamalau), emperors (mata’ele’ele), wrasses (sugale, lalafi),unicornfish (ili’ilia/ume), butterflyfish (tifitifi), juvenile mullets ( ua), damselfish/gregories and angelfish (tu’u’u), goatfish (i’asina), scads (atule) and snappers (taiva/mala’i). The small mullets ( ua <8cm), damselfishes/gregories and angelfish (tu’u’u) and Samoan anchovy (sal )are for consumption and not for sale and are usually caught using cast nets.

Other fishes that are consumed in smaller numbers or not so important at these villages are the triggerfish (sumu), puffers (sue), porcupine fish (tautu), scorpionfish (nofu), ponyfishes (mumu)and trunkfishes (moamoa). At Ta’elefaga the igaga fish, as the villagers stated, used to breed in the Ta’elefaga River, appearing at the river mouth once a year is now absent.

114

5.5.1 Fishers Creel Survey and Abundance of Finfishes

Small finfish not only provide the daily intake of Samoan families but are being sold to earn money by selling within the fishers’ own villages, at the market, shops or along the roadside.The fishers’ creel surveys show at least 28 species of finfish caught by fishers at the four study sites (Table 5.6).

Table 5.6: Frequency of finfish catches from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of fishers and total catches of fish in villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

G41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Laea/Fuga Parrotfish Scarus spp. 24/252 1/3 6/46 2/3 33/304 Palani/Alogo/Pone

Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 12/67 1/14 12/86 2/118 27/265

Tu’u’u, Mutu Gregories, Sergeants

Abudefdul spp.Stegastes spp.

8/208 0/0 0/0 1/3 9/211

Anae/Aua Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

5/22 2/21 4/74 2/22 13/139

Ata’ata/Gatala Groupers/Cods Epinephelus spp.Cephalopholis spp.Plectropomusleopardus

12/49 1/3 4/10 2/4 19/66

Malatea/Lalafi/Sugale

Maori wrass Wrasse

Cheilinus spp.Halichoeres hartzfeldiiHemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodonmeleagris

11/53 0 1/3 1/3 13/59

Malava/KikoPa’u’ulu/Lo

Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 8/26 0 5/14 3/14 16/54

Malau/Tamalau Squirrelfish

Soldierfish

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

13/40 0 1/8 2/3 16/51

Manini Convictsurgeonfish

Acanthurus triostegus 13/40 1/1 4/6 1/1 19/48

Moana/Vete/I’asina

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

9/25 0 5/21 1/1 15/47

115

Filoa/Mata’ele’ele

Emperors Lethrinus spp. 7/11 0 6/21 2/13 15/45

Ume/Ili’ilia Unicornfish Naso spp. 5/19 0 1/16 1/3 7/38 Tifitifi Butterflyfish Chaetodon spp.

Forcipiger spp.HemitaurichthyspolylepisHeniochus spp.

9/25 0 0 1/3 10/28

Mala’i/Taiva/Tamala

Snappers Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

4/13 0 1/11 0 5/24

Laulaufau/Pe’ape’a

Moorish Idol Zanclus cornutus 5/12 0 0 0 5/12

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

2/3 1/1 2/4 2/2 7/10

Sapoanae/Malauli/Lupo

Trevallies/Jacks CarangidaeSeriola rivolianaScomberoidescommersonianus

1/4 0 1/3 0 2/7

Tautu Porcupine Diodon spp. 1/1 0 1/1 1/4 3/6Sal Samoan achovy Stolephorus apiensis 0 0 0 1/5 1/5 Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 0 1/4 1/1 0 2/5Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatus 1/3 0 0 0 1/3Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1/1 0 1/1 0 2/2Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthysquadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

0 0 0 2/2 2/2

Atule Purse-eye scad SelarcrumenophthalmusDecapterus spp.

0 0 0 1/2 1/2

Ali Flounder Samariscus triocellatus 0 1/1 0 1/1 2/2 A’u/Ise Longtom Platybelone argalus

platyura0 1/1 0 0 1/1

Ganue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp. 1/1 0 0 0 1/1Mumu Ponyfish Leiognathus spp.

Gazza minuta0 0 0 1/1 1/1

Nofu Scorpionfish Scorpaenopsis cirrhosa 1/1 0 0 0 1/1

The parrotfish (laea, fuga) is the most commonly caught finfish mainly at Gagaifo where the high number of fishers were the night diving/spearing fishers. Gregories (tu’u’u) are also abundant at Gagaifo whilst mullets (anae, ua) are in good supply at all villages, which were mainly caught using cast and gillnets.

116

The surgeonfish, Acanthurus lineatus (alogo) and Ctenochaetus striatus (pone) are the most common finfish found at Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Vailele Villages. The supply of these is adequate, but not abundant as it used to be. Similarly the squirrelfish, Myripristis spp. (malau)and Sargocentron spp. (tamalau) are abundant, particularly at Gagaifo and Vailele, but the fish are considerably smaller in size than in the past.

Other common small finfish in good supply at the research areas include rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo);jack (lupo); convict surgeonfish (manini); silver biddy (matu) and damselfish (mutu) that are caught mainly by cast nets. Finfish like the Moorish idol (laulaufau), snappers (taiva),butterflyfish (tifitifi) are in good supply but the moonfish (koko), flounder (ali), Samoan anchovy (sal ), herring (pelupelu) are low in supply and were not caught by all fishers or at all of the study villages.

The finfishes caught by fishers were usually less than ten per individuals catch. The only species that were in ample numbers per catch and caught in abundance of more than nine or ten in numbers particularly during night diving and spearing were smaller parrotfishes (fuga), convict surgeonfish (manini) and other surgeonfishes (alogo, pone), whilst high number of gregories/damselfishes (tu’u’u) were caught by diving/spearing in daytime and juvenile mullets ( ua) by cast nets.

The gregories/damselfishes (tu’u’u) and the parrotfish (fuga) were the only two types of which the number caught was more than thirty, while surgeonfish (alogo, pone, manini) juvenile mullets ( ua), goatfish (vete), rabbitfishes (pa’u’ulu/lo), butterfly fish (tifitifi) and groupers (gatala) were caught in numbers of twenty and below. Most of the other species for example snappers (mala’i), emperors (mata’ele’ele), wrasses (sugale), unicornfish (ili’ilia) and others were caught in lower numbers (below 10 per catch).

Small finfish have been over-fished, especially in terms of taking the undersized species, and this has led to the decline and rarity of many types of fish in the study areas (Table 5.7).

117

Table 5.7: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species are listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note:1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Small finfish Abundance Rare (r), declining (d) & depleted (dp)

Total

Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Atule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus 1r 2dp 1d 4Pinel <4cm Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 1d 1r 1r 3Vete/Afulu Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp. 1d 1d 2 Lupo Jack Carangidae (<8cm) 2d 2 Tu’u’u Gregorys Stegastes spp. 2r 2 Pala’ia(<4cm)

Brittle-toothedsurgeonfish

Ctenochaetus striatus 1d 1d 2

Igaga/k k ?<4cm 2dp 2Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus lineatus 1d 1Mat lau Goatfish Parupeneus spp. 1d 1Ili’ilia Unicornfish Naso lituarus 1d 1Mumu Common Ponyfish Leiognsthus equula 1d 1Pelupelu Herring Sardinella albella 1r 1Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 1d 1

Many important small finfish and other organisms (Figures 5.6a–g) are still available at Gagaifo and Vailele Villages, while the amount has declined in Fagaloa Bay. In Table 5.7 the fishers identified small finfishes that had reportedly declined, become rare or depleted from their villages.The people of Fagaloa district refer to the purse-eye scad (atule) as Ta’elefaga’s fish. In previous years the schools of atule fish appeared at the head of Fagaloa Bay annually, where Ta’elefaga is located, and the whole village community of men, women and children participated in catching schools of atule. Currently the villagers of Ta’elefaga and neighbouring Ma’asina claim that this finfish is rare or could be depleted from their lagoon.

In the late 1990s, after the establishment of the power station in Ta’elefaga, the atule was appearing at two or three year interval instead of annually. But in the last five years this fish has not appeared at all, leading to the claim that it is now absent from Ta’elefaga. At Vailele the purse-eye scad exists but has declined near the shore where cast nets used to catch it.

118

Figures 5.6a–g: Some important small finfishes, eels and sharks caught at the study villages

5.6 Molluscs

a) Gagaifo: sergeants, juvenile mullets, rabbitfish & goatfish caught by castnet

b) Vailele: flounder caught by spearing - ali

e) Ta’elefaga night catch: grouper,wrasse, convict surgeonfish & lobsters

c) Gagaifo: moray eels caught by night fishers - pusi

g) Vailele: black-tip shark caught by gillnet - malie

f) Ta’elefaga night diving/ spearing fisher beyond the reef: surgeonfish, goatfish, rabbitfish

d) Gagaifo night catch by diving/spearing: surgeonfish, squirrelfish, parrotfish, rabbitfish, moray eels etc.

The unicornfish, Naso lituarus (ili’ilia) has declined in the lagoon of Gagaifo while herring, Sardinella albella (pelupelu) and angelfish/damselfish (tu’u’u) are rare at Vailele. The unicornfish which villagers cook or consume raw is a sought after fish for both consumption and sale. As stated by fishers at Gagaifo, this species is over-fished especially by night fishers, and it has declined rapidly because they even catch the undersized fish. The gregories and damselfishes (tu’u’u) have declined at Vailele due to destructive techniques used by women in previous years to fish this type of finfish.

The schools of juvenile bristtle-toothed surgeonfish (pala’ia) that used to be seen often at Gagaifo and Vailele hardly appears annually nowadays. Similarly, the schools of juvenile

119

rabbitfish (pinel ) that used to appear annually at Ta’elefaga and Vailele have declined or is seen once in every two or three years. The igaga juvenile fish that breeds in the Ta’elefaga River, which was formerly caught by the villagers at the Ta’elefaga River mouth, is now absent according to respondents. The silver biddy (matu) and the small jacks (lupo) that used to be caught by hook and line at Vailele have declined and are hardly caught using this method of fishing on the shore or lagoon though some are still taken near or on the reefs by using cast nets

At Ma’asina apart from the rare or depleted purse-eye scad (atule) other small finfish such as the eel catfish, Plotosus lineatus (apoa), goatfishes, Mulloidichthys flavolineatus, Mulloidichthyssamoensis (vete) and Parupeneus trifasciatus, P. multifasciatus (matulau) as well as the ponyfish, Leiognsthus equula (mumu) have declined.

According to many fishers the sizes of many finfish are getting smaller and many fishers’ fish even undersized specimens especially unicornfish (ili’ilia) at Gagaifo and surgeonfish at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The juvenile mullets ( ua), rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo), anchovies (sal ),purse-eye scads (atule) and goatfish (vete/i’asina) are the species caught by cast nets on the shore particularly the undersized juvenile mullets, rabbitfish and purse-eye scads.

5.6 RAYS, SHARKS, MORAY EELS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE

Rays and sharks are vital species but not fished much at the study villages and the social groups identified rays and sharks found and sometimes seen mainly near and beyond the reefs (Table 5.8).

120

Table 5.8: Frequency with which specified species of sharks, rays and moray eels are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sharks and rays present at the study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

SharksGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Moemoeao/Miliga

Black-tip reef sharks Nabrius ferrugineus 3 2 1 3 9

Mataitaliga Scalloped Hammerhead Sphyrna lewini 2 2 1 5 Ta’aneva Spotted nurse shark Stegostoma fasciatum 1 1Aso Mackerel shark Isurus oxyrinchus 1 1Rays Fai pe’a Spotted eagle ray Aetobatis narinari 3 2 2 3 10Fai pala? Coachwhip stingray Himantura fai? 2 2 2 3 9Fai malie Manta ray Manta birostris 1 1 3 5Fai gatae? 1 1 1 2 5Fai tala Blue spot Stingray Dasyatis kuhlii 1 1 2Moray eels & snakesAiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 3 2 2 3 10Pusi gatala/ Maoa’e

Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicus 3 2 2 3 10

Onea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinus 3 2 2 3 10Tafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax

flavimarginatus3 2 1 3 9

I’aui Conger eel Conger cinereus 2 2 3 7Auvaeloloa Moray eel Enchelycore

schismatorhynchus2 1 3

Gatamea Snake eels Myrichthus spp. 1 1 2 Gata sami/ Galio

Sea snake Pelamis platurus 3 2 2 3 10

Soloalalo Sea snake Laticauda 2 3 5

Rays are rare at all villages and none were observed or caught by fishers during the time of the fieldwork. The untitled men respondents at Gagaifo stated that rays are occasionally seen but some of them lack the skill to fish this species.

The scalloped hammerhead shark (mata’italiga) and mackerel shark (aso) are rare at these villages. Some fishers at Gagaifo and Vailele caught a few small black-tip reef sharks (malie) by gill nets. A turtle was seen once when snorkelling in the lagoon of Gagaifo during a rough high tide. The fishers’ creel survey caught only a few moray eels and sharks (Table 5.9).

121

Table 5.9: Frequency of sharks and moray eels from the fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of sharks and moray eels, and fishers total catches in the study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

SharksG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Moemoeao/Miliga

Black-tip reef sharks

Nabrius ferrugineus 1/1 1/1 2/2

Moray eels Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 1/1 1/10 2/11Pusi gatala/ Maoa’e

Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicus 2/2 1/10 3/12

Onea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinus 1/1 1/10 2/10

The two fishers at Gagaifo and Vailele caught one black-tip reef sharks each (malie) (Figure 5.6g) by gill nets near the reef and none were caught at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina.

The moray eels are still in good supply particularly at Gagaifo and Vailele, however not many fishers laid out traps during the time of the fieldwork. The starry moray eel (aiaiuga), the giant moray eel (pusi gatala) and the eel snake (onea) were the common types caught by the few fishers using eel traps and night diving/spearing fishers at Gagaifo. The villages of Gagaifo and Vailele usually lay out eel traps overnight during the weekend for meals on Sundays. The conger eel (i’aui) are not eaten in these villages, nor are sea snakes. None of these species were seen at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina where there was less fishing activities taking place during the time of the fieldwork.

5.7 MOLLUSCS

Molluscs are vital seafood for consumption and earning income, for example at Vailele, where seafoods are sold along the roadside. Both female and male fishers listed a variety of molluscs found and considered important in their villages (Table 5.10).

122

Table 5.10: Frequency with which specified molluscs species are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Women groups listed more shellfishes than men; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Molluscs present at Study villages – Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Large shellfish Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Faisua Clam Tridacna spp. 3 2 2 3 10Foafoa/Saosao? Triton trumpet shell Charonia tritonis 1 1 1 1 4Pala’au Spider conch shells Lambis spp. 1 1 1 3Small shellfish PipiPipi-tu

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

3 2 2 3 10

Sisi Freshwater andnerite snails

Neritina and Nerita spp. 3 2 2 3 10

Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 3 2 1 3 9Aliao Top shell Tectus pyramis 3 2 1 2 8Fole Pen shells Pinna spp. 2 1 2 3 8Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 1 2 3 6Pule Tiger cowry

CowryCypraea tigrisCypraea spp.

3 2 1 6

Pae Ark shell Anadara sp. 1 1 1 2 5Tapula’a Turban Turbo sp. 3 2 5 Fatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus spp. 1 2 1 4 Li Surf clam Atactodea striata 2 2 4Matapisu Limpets Patelloida sp., Cellana sp. 1 2 3 Tio Rock oyster Crassostrea mordax 1 2 3Asi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp. 1 1 2 Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulus 1 1 2Asi’asi Scallop shell Pectinidae 1 1 2Tifa Black-lip pearl oyster Pinctada margaritifera 1 1Patupatu Vase shell Vasidae 1 1 U’u Brown mussel Modiolus sp. 1 1Sea hares and Sea slugsGau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 3 2 2 3 10Gaupapa Sea slug Onchidium 3 3 Matefanau Sea hare Aplysia sp. 1 1 2Octopus and SquidsFe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Gufe’e Cuttlefish Sepia sp. 3 2 2 2 9

5.7.1 Large and Small Shellfishes

Large and small shellfishes (Figures 5.7 a–f) are important in the study villages, particularly for local consumption. Large species are uncommon at the study villages, mainly giant clams, which

123

have been over-havested and have declined or become rare in many villages in Samoa. The large shellfishes identified in all villages are the trumpet shell (foafoa), spider shells (pala’au)and importantly the giant clams (faisua). Giant clams were normally found on and beyond the reef while trumpet and spiders shells are now rarely found on reefs but occasionally exist beyond the reefs.

Figures 5.7a–f: Some of the important shellfishes at the study villages

a)Ta’elefaga: the rare venus shell - tugane

b) Gagaifo: turbo, top shell with sea cucumbers - aliao

f) Vailele: pen shell - fole

c) Gagaifo: abundant Violetasaphis - pipi

e) Gagaifo: giant clam - faisuad) Gagaifo: turbo and tiger cowry - alili, pule

The trumpet triton and spider conch were usually fished in previous years for their traditional significance, like using them as trumpets (foafoa) to call village council meetings and other occasions. These shellfishes have also been sold for handicraft decorations or as tourist souvenirs however today these shellfishes are rarely found. The giant clams – Tridacna spp.(faisua) are still found, but have been over-harvested.

Of small shellfishes, the respondents identified at least 18 species that are amongst the most important for selling and consumption. The most important shellfish for sale and consumption are the top shells (ali’ao), turban shells (alili), venus clams (tugane) and pen shells (fole). The asaphis (pipi) is the most commonly gathered shellfish at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga, but only for consumption.

124

Village children collect cowries, Cypraea tigris and Cypraea spp. (pule); thorny oyster (fatu ua);rock oyster (tio); small surf clams (li) and nerite snails (sisi). The other shellfishes like vase shells (patupatu); limpets (matapisu); ark shells (pae) and scallop shells (asi’asi) are generally found at Vailele and reported as naturally rare at other villages.

5.7.2 Creel Survey and Abundance of Molluscs

The lagoons of Vailele and Gagaifo are much wider compared to those of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina Villages. Vailele has a greater variety of seafood compared to Gagaifo and similarly, Ta’elefaga used to have a wide varieties of marine organisms like Vailele, but most have declined or disappeared after the establishment of the hydro power station there. Large shellfishes have declined dramatically with some small shellfishes mainly at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina such as the turbo, top shell, venus clams and the depleted pen shells (Table 5.11).

Table 5.11: Frequency with which specified species of mollucss are known and listed as declined, rare and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Molluscs frequency Rare (r), Declined (d) & Depleted (dp) (x/10)

Total

X10

ShellfishGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Faisua Clam Tridacna spp. 2d 2r 2r 1d 7Fole Pen shells Pinna sp. 1dp 2dp 3Aliao Top shell Tectus pyramis 1d 1r 1d 1d 3Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 1d 2r 3Foafoa/Pu Trumpet shell Charonia tritonis 1r 1r 2Pala’au Spider shells Lambis lambis 1d 1d 2Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 1d 1r 1r 1d 2Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulus 1d 1Asi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp. 1d 1Sea hares Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 2dp 2dp 4Octopus & Squids Fe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp. 2r 1r

1d2d 6

Gufe’e Reef squid Sepioteuthislessoniana

1d 1d 2

125

According to the respondents in all villages the trumpet shells (foafoa) and spider shells (pala’au) were naturally low in supply in nearshore areas and are even hard to find nowadays beyond the reef.

Reef gleaning for particular shellfish was intense in the 1970s to the 1990s particularly the giant clams that became scarce throughout Upolu and Savai’i Islands due to over-fishing. For example, the giant clams declined at Gagaifo and Vailele while they became rare at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Currently, giant clams have just started to recover at Gagaifo and fishers claimed that it may attributed to less gleaning activities by women fishers on the reef in the last ten years or so.

In addition to over-harvesting of giant clams, important small shellfish like the top shell (ali’ao)and the turban shells (alili) have declined at Gagaifo and Vailele and have nearly disappeared from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina due to over-harvesting that is now coupled with high sedimentation. These species according to fishers are mainly gathered at nighttime during low tides in full moon (po masina) as they are hardly found in daytime. Apart from over-fishing reef degradation has increased the problem especially when rubble banks covered much of Vailele and Ma’asina reefs after the cyclones in the early 1990s. These species had declined from Gagaifo because of intense over-harvesting in previous years mainly by night fishers.

Many small shellfishes are naturally rare at Gagaifo, such as the littleneck clam, Tapes literata(asi’asi), black-lip pearl oyster, (tifa), arc shell, Arcidae (asi), olive shells, (panea) and the thorny oyster (fatu ua).

According to fishers creel surveys at the four villages (Table 5.12) only a few species of shellfish have been harvested or found by fishers during the fieldwork.

126

Table 5.12: Frequency of molluscs from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) i = individual, b = individuals in bottle, m = mixed bottle of sea cucumbers, gonads and sea hares; 3) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of molluscs and total catches in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

ShellfishG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Faisua Giant clams Tridacna spp. 2/4 1/1 0 2/3 5/8iPipiPipit

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

4/136 0 1/2 1/4 6/142i

Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 2/13 2/13Sisi Nerite snails Nerita spp. 1/4 1/7 2/11Fole Pen shells Pinna spp. 5/2b

7/8m 12/10Pule Tiger cowry Cypraea tigris 1/2 1/2 Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 1/2 1/2Aliao Top shells Tectus pyramis 1/1 1/1 Sea hares & Sea slugs Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 8/31i

1/2b11/9m

8/31

12/11Gaupapa/ta’iafo?

Sea slug Onchidium 2/2i 2/2

Octopus Fe’e Octopus Octopus sp. 3/4 4/7 7/11

The villages of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina have less activities of reef gleaning because of less species available. The giant clam is still the important large shellfish but it is uncommon and rare especially at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina and only five out of the total 108 fishers gathered giant clams at Gagaifo, Ma’asina and Vailele. The violet asaphis (pipi) is the main shellfish being gathered by women and children of Gagaifo. The few top and turban shells gathered were from the reef at Gagaifo Village at night time and none were collected at other sites.

The venus clam (tugane) that was important and common in Ta’elefaga still exists, but has become rare even in the mangrove estuary on the west end of the village. Some reports like the environmental impact assessment (EIA) done at Fagaloa recorded that this shellfish has been eradicated from Ta’elefaga; however, during this research the children and researcher collected venus clams, though not in high quantity. Many adults stated that this shellfish is depleted, as it is hardly collected nowadays because the villagers avoid consuming small shellfish on the shore and the degraded discolored lagoon.

127

Apart from the dirty discoloured lagoon, the rapid deposition of sediment from the Ta’elefagaRiver due to discharge wastewater from the hydroelectric power station and silt runoff from the small creek at the mangrove community contribute to the rarity of venus clam (tugane).

The pen shell, Pinna sp. (fole) is highly available at Vailele as it grows in seagrass beds that cover much of the lagoon. The pen shell used to be abundantly available at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina but now disappeared after the establishment of the power station. This is obvious at these Fagaloa Villages, especially at Ta’elefaga, where the lagoon is now quite bare and almost entirely covered with silt/sediments and brown seagrasses. Other species less important and fished mainly by children are the turbo, Turbo sp. (tapula’a), tiger cowry (pule), and nerite snails (sisi) mainly at Gagaifo and Vailele.

The high percentage of pen shells was recorded only from Vailele as it is not found at Gagaifo and had disappeared from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The venus clam (tugane) was uncommon and not gathered much at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina because of its scarcity. Some night fishers at Gagaifo found a few top shells, turban snails and violet asaphis (pipi), which were frequently dug up by women and children.

The green sea hare, Dollabella auricularia (gau) is still present and is an important seafood at Vailele for consumption and sale. Even though the green sea hare is still in good supply at Vailele the fishers said it is not as abundant as it was before, as a result of over- harvesting.

Like the pen shell the green sea hare (gau) has been eradicated from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina according to respondents in Table 5.11, because of high sedimentation and unclean lagoon as a result of the power station at Ta’elefaga. The sea hare is naturally rare at Gagaifo whereas the sea slug, Onchidium (gaupapa) is common on volcanic rocks that extend further from shore outwards into the lagoon. The sea hare catch was only from Vailele and this was for consumption and selling along the roadside.

The octopus, Octopus sp. (fe’e) is adequate in supply (Table 5.11) at Gagaifo and Vailele but not as abundant as they used to be in previous years because of over-fishing for consumption.

128

The reef squid, Sepioteuthis lessoniana (gufe’e) has declined due to over-harvesting mainly forbait used in moray eels traps. Some fishers at Vailele and Gagaifo caught octopus and none were caught at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina during the time of the fieldwork.

5.8 SEA CUCUMBERS, SEA URCHINS AND SEA STARS

Sea cucumbers and sea urchins are significant to the local people’s diet. Most sea cucumbers are available at Vailele and Gagaifo with their clear waters while they have declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina as less numbers of these were seen while diving at these areas (Table 5.13).

Table 5.13: Frequency with which specified species of sea-cucumbers, sea-urchins and sea-stars are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Women groups listed more sea-cucumbers and sea-urchins than men; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sea cucumbers present atthe study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Sea-cucumberGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 x/10

Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 3 2 2 3 10Loli Lollyfish

Blackfish Holothuria atraActinopyga miliaris

3 2 2 3 10

Greenfish Maisu Stichopus chloronatus 3 2 2 3 10Mama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga mauritiana

Actinopyga echinites3 1 2 3 9

Neti Curryfish Stichopus variegates 2 2 1 2 7Sea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulis 2 2 1 2 7Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 2 2 3 7Peva synaptid Synapta maculata 2 1 1 2 6Ulutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argus 1 1 1 2 5Sea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaei 3 2 2 3 10Vaga Long spine urchin Diadema setosum 3 2 2 3 10Sava’e/Satula Short-spine sea

urchinTripneustes gratilla 3 2 2 3 10

Ofaofa Heart urchin Brissus latecarinatus? 2 2 2 6Sea Stars Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigata 3 2 2 3 10Aveau (fa’aatualoa) Serpent star Ophiocoma sp. 3 1 1 2 7Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicus 2 1 3 6Alamea Crown of thorn Acanthaster planci 3 1 1 2 6Palutu Pincushion star Culcita granulatus 2 1 1 1 4

129

The results show that the black lollyfish (loli), brown sand fish (fugafuga) and the surf redfish

(mama’o) are found in all villages. These are also the main sea cucumbers fished by women and children for family consumption and earning cash for some families at Vailele.

Pricklyfish, Stichopus horrens (sea mao’i) gonads are the most important and expensive product from sea cucumbers, but found only at Vailele. The pricklyfish is naturally rare at Gagaifo and had disappeared from Ta'elefaga and Ma'asina Villages. The pinkfish, Holothuria edulis (seaamu’u) is in good abundance but hardly eaten. Some of these species discussed were seen at these villages as shown in Figures 5.8a-f.

Figures 5.8a-f: Some important sea cucumbers and other marine species at the study villages

a)Vailele kid with octopus – fe’e

f) Vailele: pricklyfish with gonads - sea mao'i

b) Gagaifo: lollyfish, loli & crown-of-thorns starfish

d) Gagaifo: sandfish & surf red sea cucumbers - fugafuga,mama’o

c) Vailele: Cleaning sea hare, gau

e) Gagaifo: sea amu’u on the reef

The four sea urchin species listed (Table 5.13) are the only known species found at the study villages except for the heart urchin, Brissus latecarinatus? (ofaofa) that is absent from Ta’elefaga. The boring sea urchin (tuitui), the long spine urchin (vaga) and the short spine urchin (sava’e/satula) are the most important for consumption at all villages and are fished mainly by women and children. This is supported by the results of the creel surveys (Table 5.14) that show that sea urchins and sea cucumbers are very important at Vailele.

130

Table 5.14: Frequency of sea cucumbers and sea urchins from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) i = individuals (not cleanse), b = 1 particular species in bottle, m = bottle of mixed sea cucumbers with gonads, pen shells and sea hares, s = sack of boring urchins; 3) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of sea cucumbers and sea urchins and fishers total catches in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals

# fisher /catch

Sea cucumber G41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 1/1w 1/2w 1/1i11/10b24/20m

1/1

35/30Loli Lollyfish Holothuria atra 1/1b 18/10m 18/10 Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 1/4i

4/2m1/44/2

Mama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga spp. 1/1w 2/12i 2/12 Sea urchins Tuitui Boring sea urchin Echinometra matthaei 1/12

6/5s1/126/5s

Vaga Long spined urchin

Diadema setosum 1/51/18 2/23

The most gathered sea cucumbers during the fieldwork were the sand fish (fugafuga), surf redfish (mama’o) and lollyfish (loli). These abundant species are commercially important at Vailele and only for consumption at Gagaifo, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Women fishers of Vailele cleanse, cut in pieces and bottled various sea cucumbers – fugafuga, mama'o, loli, sea mao’i(pricklyfish gonads) and mix them with sea hare (gau) and pen shells (fole) to sell along the roadside to the villagers and passing traffic. A few lollyfish and brown sandfish were seen at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga and none were collected at Ta’elefaga while at Ma’asina only one fisher found two brown sandfish.

The boring sea urchin (tuitui) is significant at Vailele not only for consumption but also for sale. Women and children gather sea uchins from the reef using empty rice sacks. Baskets of sea urchins are commonly sold at Vailele Village, which is the stopping site on the east coast of Upolu for passing traffic to buy sea urchins.

The long spine urchins (vaga) were gathered but only for consumption. During the research, sea urchins were seen in smaller quantity at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina but there were no fishers

131

gathering sea urchins at these villages at the time. At Gagaifo, sea urchins are highly abundant but only for consumption, and none were gathered during the fieldwork.

5.8.1 Abundance of Sea cucumbers, Urchins and Sea Stars

The questionnaires surveys indicate that all the common types of sea cucumbers have declined at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga Villages while they are still in good supply in the clean clear lagoons of Gagaifo and Vailele (Table 5.15).

Table 5.15: Frequency with which specified species of sea cucumbers, sea urchins and sea stars are known and listed as declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Sea cucumbers, urchins and stars supply Declined (d), Rare(r) and Depleted (dp) x10

Total

x/10

Sea-cucumberGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 2r 2r 4Sea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulis 2d 1r 3Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 1d 1d 2 Neti Curryfish Stichopus variegates 1r 1r 2 Ulutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argus 1d 1Maisu Greenfish Stichopus chloronatusPeva Synaptid Synapta maculateSea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaei 1d

1r2r 4

Sava’e/Satula Short-spine sea urchin Tripneustes gratilla 1r 1r 2Sea Stars Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicus 1r 1r 2Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigata 1d 1Alamea Crown of thorns starfish Acanthaster planci 1d 1d 1d 1

Of the species in Table 5.15 the curryfish (neti) and the leopardfish, (ulutunu) are uncommon and the inedible Synapta maculata (peva) and greenfish, Stichopus chloronatus (maisu) are still in good supply at the study villages. Fishers at Gagaifo explained that the greenfish was commercially fished at one time in the past when a company used to collect and buy this species from the local fishers and exported overseas. The pricklyfish (sea) and curryfish (neti) was naturally uncommon at Gagaifo while other species of sea cucumbers are abundant.

132

Although it seems that all the sea cucumbers listed are in good supply at Vailele, they are not as plentiful as they used to be due to over-fishing for subsistence and commercial uses. Furthermore, the cyclones in 1990 and 1991 covered much of the reef with rubble Island banks and the prickly fish (sea) have decreased. However, the pricklyfish gonads are the only edible parts of the pricklyfish and this has made it possible for this seafood to regenerate but their sizes are getting smaller because of high and rapid subsistence and commercial use.

The sea urchins like the long spined urchin (vaga) is still in good supply at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, whereas the boring sea urchin (tuitui) and the short spined urchin (sava’e) have become rare nowadays (Figures 5.9 f and g). The boring sea urchin was also reported in previous studies as being eradicated from Fagaloa Bay however the boring urchin was seen even though in low quantity during snorkelling observations. The small sized heart sea urchin, Brissuslatecarinatus? (ofaofa) found in sandy areas nearshore and which children and women usually dig for is uncommon and not gathered in the research areas.

Sea stars in Table 5.13 are not edible but they are significant marine organisms found throughout Samoa (Fig 5.9 a-d). Their quantity is also low at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The blue starfish, Linckia laevigata (aveau moana) is highly available in the clean waters of Vailele and Gagaifo. The white starfish, Archaster typicus (aveau aloalo) is naturally rare at Gagaifo, abundant at Vailele but now rare at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The pincushion star, Culcita granulatus(palutu) was commonly seen in the lagoons of Vailele and Gagaifo.

The crown-of-thorns starfish (Figure 5.9e), Acanthaster planci (alamea) was widespread in the 1970s to the early 1990s mainly at Gagaifo and Vailele, compared to Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. It is still present at Vailele and Gagaifo but their numbers have declined, and none were seen at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina where sedimentation is high and corals are degraded.

5.9 JELLYFISH, SEA ANEMONE, SEAWEEDS, SEA WORMS AND ABUNDANCE

There are many other marine species that make up the local people’s diet, some of which are found at the research areas. For example sea anemone, seaweeds and sea worms as listed by the groups of fishers (Table 5.16).

133

Table 5.16: Frequency with which specified species of jellyfish, sea-anemone, seaweeds and sea worms are known and listed in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Species present at study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

JellyfishGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Alualu Upside-down jellyfish Casseopea sp. 2 1 1 3 7Sea anemone Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp. 3 2 2 2 9Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp. 3 1 2 2 8Seaweeds Limu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvillei 3 2 2 3 10Limu fuafua Seaweed/sea grape Caulerpa racemosa 3 1 1 3 8Sea worms Atoaloa sami Giant bristle worm Eunice sp. 2 2 1 2 7Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridis 3 3Moloasi Boring peanut worm? 2 1 3Ipo Peanut worm Siphonosomaaustrale 1 1 2

The jellyfish is naturally uncommon at study villages except when the sea is rough, and some tend to wash onto their shores. Sea anemone (matalelei, lumane) is eaten but not commercially important to the villages of Ma’asina, Ta’elefaga and Vailele, though in Gagaifo some families gather sea anemone and sell it in their village or at the market in Apia (Figure 5.9 i and j). At Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina sea anemone is rare or near depletion from these villages, as is also the case with seaweeds, shellfishes and other species.

The sea grape, (limu fuafua) is naturally rare at the study sites whilst the red seaweed (limua’au) is available on the reefs of these four villages (Figure 5.9h). These seaweeds are both consumed but not commercially important at the study sites. The red seaweed is consumed after it is cooked and it was only at Vailele that about three fishers’ collected this seafood during the fieldwork for consumption (Figure 5.17). The groups’ questionnaires identified some species that have declined and become rare at the study villages (Table 5.17).

134

Table 5.17: Frequency with which specified species of sea-anemone, seaweeds and sea worms are known and listed have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sea anemone, moray eels, seaweeds & sea worms supply - Declined, Rare & Depleted (dp)

Total

Sea anemone Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp. 2r 1r1dp

1d 4

Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp. 1r 2 3SeaweedsLimu fuafua Seaweed Caulerpa racemosa 1dp 1dp 2r

1dp5

Limu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvillei 1d 1r 1d 2Moray eels Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 1d 1d 1Tafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax

flavimarginatus1d 1d 1

Sea worms Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridis 1d 1

According to the fishers’ creel surveys the sea anemone (matalelei) was among the occasionally gathered species with five fishers that collected a total of 10 baskets of sea anemone during the two and half weeks of the fieldstudy at Gagaifo. These fishers at Gagaifo Village cooked sea anemone and sold at the market in Apia Town. During the creel survey only about three fishers gathered the limu a’au for consumption at Vailele.

The peanut worm, Siphonosoma australe (ipo) was found only at Ta’elefaga, where a mangrove community exists, but it is uncommon and not gathered by the villagers. The palolo worm, Eunice viridis (palolo), a delicacy that rises twice a year in the months of October and November is found only at Gagaifo and the neighbouring village of Matautu in the Lefaga District and is naturally absent from Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

In the mid-to late 1990s this delicacy disappeared for nearly five years from Gagaifo and it is only just recently that the palolo risings started to recur but in less quantity.

135

The respondents suggested that the palolo disappeared as a result of coral destruction from fishing activities like the use of fish poison, commercial activities in exporting corals and the impact of the crown-of-thorns starfish.

Other worms are inedible and not commercially significant. For example, the boring peanut worm (moloasi) as stated by the fishers at Gagaifo to be found at sites where asaphis shellfish (pipi)are dig up usually by women and children. The brittle sea worms are also present at all these sites, especially Vailele Village where it is common. Some of these species as discussed above were seen during the fieldwork (Figures 5.9a-l).

Figures 5.9a–l: Other important marine species at the study villages

5.9.1 Crustaceans and abundance

f) Ma’asina: long spined urchin - vaga

i) Gagaifo: boiling sea anemone - matalelei

h) Vailele: Halymenia seaweed - limu a’au

b) Vailele: white starfish – aveau aloalo

c) Vailele: brittle starfish a) Blue star - aveau

l) Gagaifo: edible sea slug – Onchidiumgaupapa/ta’iafo? k) Vailele: brittle

worm - atoaloasami

g) Vailele: boring sea urchin - tuitui

d) Vailele: pin cushion star

e) Gagaifo: crown-of-thorns starfish-alamea

j) Gagaifo: picking sea anemone from coralafter boiling

136

5.10 CRUSTACEANS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE

Crabs and lobsters are vital species providing food for special occasions for selling and family meals. The interviewed groups listed a variety of crustaceans found at their villages (Table 5.18) but not all of these were caught during the fieldwork.

Table 5.18: Frequency with which specified crustacean species are known and listed by fishers in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Crustaceans present at the study villages. Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

CrabsGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Amaama Grapsid crab Grapsus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrata 3 2 2 3 10Tutu/kuku Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatus 3 2 2 3 10Vaevaeuli Black-claw reef

crabEtisus sp.? 2 2 2 3 9

Tupa Land/Beach crab Cardisoma carnifex 2 2 3 7Matamea Red-eye crab Eriphia sebana 3 1 1 1 6U’a Red-claw land crab Sesarma erythrodactyla 1 2 1 4Avi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda ceratophthalmus 2 1 1 3 7Tupu-o-pa’a? 3 3 Pa’atala Spiny swimmer

crabThalamita sp.

1 1 2

Tapola Burrowing crab Calappa sp. 1 1 2 Coconut crab Birgus latro 1 1 2

Sa’esa’e Poisonous shawl crab

Zozymus? 1 1

Ataula Fiddler crab Uca sp.Lobsters Ula Spiny lobsters Panulirus penicillatus

Panulirus sp.Panulirus versicolor

3 2 2 3 10

Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Ulavai Freshwater shrimp Macrobrachium lar

Palaemon sp.1 1 2

The important crabs included the red spotted crabs (k k ) mainly caught by night fishers from Gagaifo and a few from Ta’elefaga and Vailele. A few mangrove crabs (pa’alimago) were caught using fixed gill nets at Ta’elefaga. The mangrove crab (pa’alimago) found at Ta’elefaga is naturally absent from Gagaifo and rare at Ma’asina and Vailele.

137

Mangrove crabs has now declined at Ta'elefaga due to over-harvesting by fishers using gill nets to trap crabs at the mangrove estuary.

The spiny lobsters (ula), slipper lobsters (papata) and the crabs — red spotted crab (k k ) and the black claw reef crab (vaevaeuli) — are considered the most vital and are present at all these villages, on and beyond the reef. Other edible species but are less consumed at these villages include the beach crab (tupa), grapsid crab, (ama’ama) and the red eye crab (matamea). The coconut crab ( ) used to be found in smaller numbers at Ta’elefaga but is now absent according to the respondents.

The small crabs that tend to be found on the shore are gathered by children, like the ghost crab (avi’ivi’i), red eye crab (matamea) and the land crab (tupa) and these are all abundant especially at Vailele and Gagaifo. Some of these crabs and lobsters were caught and seen at some of the study villages during the fieldwork (Figures 5.10a–h).

Figures 5.10a–h: Crustaceans seen at the study villages

a) Ta’elefaga: lobsters, ula caught at night

c) Ta’elefaga: mangrove crab, pa’alimago caught by fixed gillnet in estuary

h) Vailele: Small ghost crabs on the shore, avi’ivi’i

d) Gagaifo: red spotted crab, k kcaught by night fishers

b) Gagaifo: slipper lobster, papata collected by gillnet near the reef

f) Vailele: small crabs, avi’ivi’i under sand on shore

e) Gagaifo: red eye crab, matamea caught by children

g) Vailele: small crabs, avi’ivi’i on the shorecollected by children

138

The fishers’ creel survey shows the low number of crustaceans caught by fishers during the fieldwork (Table 5.19).

Table 5.19: Frequency of crabs and lobsters from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of crustaceans and fishers total catch in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

CrabsG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

T t /k k Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatus 5/6 0 2/4 1/1 9/11Avi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda

ceratophthalmus1/1 4/6 5/7

Matamea Red eye crab Eriphia sebana 2/3 2/3Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrata 1/2 1/2Vaevaeuli Black-claw reef

crabEtisus sp.? 1/1 1/1

Lobsters Ula sami Spiny lobsters Panulirus spp. 1/1 3/3 2/1 6/5Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp. 4/3 2/3 1/1 7/7

The crustaceans as seen by the creel survey has declined and so as with their sizes. Lobsters were caught by night diving and spearing fishers at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga. Some slipper lobsters (papata) were caught by gill nets at Gagaifo and Vailele. Children at Vailele and Gagaifo caught ghost crabs on the shore and some of these were not eaten. The red-eye crab (matamea) was common at Gagaifo but only two kids collected this species during the fieldwork.

5.11 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE SPECIES

Human activities and natural hazards affect the coast and inshore marine areas, threatening the abundance of marine and coastal resources. The demand for subsistence and commercial needs has accelerated the exploitation of marine resources.

The introduction and use of motor fishing boats (alia) in the 1970s caters for the increasing demand for fisheries products particularly commercial offshore fishing. This increase earnings for Samoa and in addition other modern efficient methods of fishing have also led to over-fishing, causing the decline and local depletion of some marine species. Many fishers have reportedly used destructive methods to increase their catches in order to earn a living as well as feeding their families.

139

5.11.1 Sedimentation and Unclean Lagoon

The discharged discoloured wastewater from the power station increases the velocity of Ta’elefaga River, intensifying sedimentation and causing a murky brown lagoon, which negatively affects inshore marine organisms. These problems exacerbated in the wet season during which the flow of many creeks into the lagoon of Fagaloa Bay increases.

As a result few diving and spearing fishers fish in the murky waters of Ta’elefaga’s lagoon but only near the reef or towards neighbouring villages where the water is clear. Hand collecting/gleaning for shellfish and other marine species are infrequently conducted now at Ta’elefaga because there are fewer invertebrates, shellfish and other seafoods available that women used to gather. Ta’elefaga fishers stated that their lagoon no longer provides the healthy seafood they used to depend on for subsistence use.

According to the surveys at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, dying corals and unclean waters in their lagoon as a result of effluent from the hydro power station caused the decline and eradication of some marine species. For example, a number of large finfish listed that used to be found in the lagoon can now be found only beyond the reef or offshore and in lesser numbers too.

Small finfish have also declined and are now caught only near the reefs. Many finfish, shellfish, sea hare and other species such as the purse-eye scad (atule), pen shells (fole) and the sea hare (gau) have become rare or taken refuge near and beyond the reef or disappeared totally from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina.

5.11.2 Fishing Activities and Methods Used

In the study villages the young generation lack the knowledge and skills in fishing that their elders possess. Marine and coastal resources are vulnerable and are not managed well due to the lack of villagers’ awareness and concern and mainly because of people's desperate need for cash and survival.

140

Problems with the nearshore marine areas of Gagaifo and Vailele include coral destruction and disturbance from destructive fishing methods and over-fishing of particular species. Barringtoniaasiatica (futu) and Derris malaccensis (ava niukini) were the major poisons used by fishers in previous years. Dynamite and chemicals like clorox were used as stated by fishers from Vailele but these are now banned. However there were a few cases of using ava niukini seen at Gagaifo during the survey.

These methods kill corals and finfish, though other species are thus damaged and the quantity of organisms in the lagoons declines. For example, at Ta'elefaga, Ma'asina and Vailele the school of juvenile rabbit fish (pinel ) rarely appears annually as it used to in previous years and only just recently that it reappears annually at Gagaifo. The villagers claimed that this was caused by the destruction of corals by the use of such fishing methods. Corals and reefs of Vailele are now covered much with coral rubble deposited by the 1990 and 1991 cyclones.

The traditional method of fishing called the fa’amo’a or tu’iga, or the smashing of corals known also as sasa’e at Vailele was a destructive technique that has reportedly damaged corals and small fishes. This method involves placing baskets (ola) on one side of a coral or corals and the fishers’ use materials like sticks or metal bars to smash the corals from the other side chasing all the fish (large and small) towards the baskets. This fishing method was practiced by women of Vailele in previous years and is stated as the main reason that the damselfishes/gregories, Stegastes spp. (tu’u’u) have declined.

Group fishing known as mata conducted by young men was a common practice, usually employed to provide food when a village’s chiefs’ council is having a meeting. This kind of fishing used spears, gill nets or the smashing of corals (sasa’e/ola) to chase and spear the fish towards gill nets or baskets. This was mainly used at Gagaifo where corals cover much of its lagoon where this technique reportedly caused coral breakage and taking of undersized fish. This fishing method is not practiced often nowadays particularly at Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Gagaifo as there are easy-to-obtain food substitutes in shops like frozean meat and canned food that can be served at such gatherings.

141

The creel survey of fishers recorded the various methods used by fishers in the study villages during the fieldwork (Figure 5.11).

Figure 5.11: Methods of fishing used at the study villages

Methods of fishing

44%

23%

10%

8%

7%

7% 1%

Handcollecting/gleaningDiving & Spearing

Gillnets

Spearing

Cast nets

Hook & line

Traps (eels)

This survey showed that hand collecting/gleaning was the most frequent activity that took place with 43% occurring mostly at Vailele with the high number of women fishers, compared to 23% of diving and spearing men mainly at Gagaifo. Less commonly used methods included spearing, hook and line and moray eel trapping (Figures 5.12a–c). Gill nets were seen being used in daytime at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo and cast nets in all villages. Hand collection contains a high proportion of the fishers due to the majority of women fishers at Vailele who fish for sea urchins, sea hares and sea cucumbers for sale and consumption.

Figures 5.12a–c: Some fishing methods and activities at the study villages

c) Vailele: moray eel traps, faga pusi

b) Vailele: kids digging for asaphis on the shore at night

a) Ta’elefaga: Fishers using a canoe, paopao and gillnets, upega

142

Reef gleaning is also damaging to corals for example at Vailele and Gagaifo where this method caused coral breakage and the fishers overturn corals, the habitat of small finfish and other marine organisms. At Gagaifo there were few women fishers seen with children gathering lollyfish (loli) and asaphis (pipi) at shore during the fieldwork.

The fishers’ creel survey (Figure 5.13) shows that many fishers (66%) spent about three to as much as six hours fishing in order to get a decent catch.

Figure 5.13: Hours and tides of fishing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Percentage and frequency

1-2hrs

3-4hrs

2-3hrs

4-5hrs

6+ hrs

Low

High

Leng

th o

f tim

e &

Low

and

hig

h tid

es

Hours and tides of fishing

Percentage 37 30 25 15 1 88 20

Frequency 34.3 27.8 23.1 13.9 0.9 81.5 18.5

1-2hrs 3-4hrs 2-3hrs 4-5hrs 6+ hrs Low High

The main tide for fishing was during low tide, which accounts for 88% of fishing activities, especially in reef gleaning, gill nets and spearing/diving. The fishing activities that took place during high tides (18.5%) were those using hook and line and cast nets mainly along the shores.

The fishers in the villages claimed that about a generation ago, fishing took one to two hours to get a large catch for a family meal and surplus to distribute. Nowadays fishing takes three and up to four hours in order to get a decent fish-catch for a family meal. At Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga diving and spearing is mainly carried out in the nighttime (Figures 5.14a–c), except when a small subsistence supply is needed, the fishers go out in the daytime. Fishers stated that it takes much longer hours to get a good catch in the daytime.

143

Figures 5.14a–c: Diving/spearing night fishers’ catches

c) Ta’elefaga: the catch include even the under sized crabs, slipper lobster and variety of finfish e.g. surgeonfish, goatfish, rabbitfish,squirrelfish etc. a) Gagaifo: parrotfish, convict

surgeonfish, rabbitfish, goatfish, moray eels, crabs

b) Gagaifo: moray eels, surgeonfish, squirrelfish, parrotfish etc

5.11.3 Impacts of Natural Disasters

Tropical cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991 devastated the coastal vegetation and nearshore marine of the study villages. The coastal vegetation of Vailele and Gagaifo was severely damaged; there was also coastal erosion in these villages. Currently banks of coral rubble exist and cover the reef fronts of Vailele and Ma’asina villages as a result of these two cyclones in 1990 and 1991 (Figures 5.15a and b).

Figures 5.15a and 5.15b: Rubble banks deposited on the reefs by cyclones Ofa (1990) and Val (1991)

a) Vailele: Island rubble bank on the reef b) Ma’asina: Coral rubble banks on the reef

144

The strong storm waves from these cyclones eroded the coast of Gagaifo, Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. At Gagaifo most people shifted inland as the area near the sea was flattened after the cyclones leaving few coastal plants (Figure 5.16).

Figure 5.16: Coast of Gagaifo Village flattened by cyclone Ofa leaving fewer coastal plants

Erosion has flattened and eroded the coast of Gagaifo as seen by Figure 5.16 and destroyed coastal plants not only at Gagaifo but also at Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The coastline has also been seriously eroded at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina and the coastal road is right next to the sea (Figure 5.17) with fewer coastal plants for protection and as shown also in Figure 4.16 a-d in Chapter four.

Figure 5.17: Coastal road at Fagaloa next to the sea as seen from Salimu Village (west ofTa'elefaga)

145

5.11.4 Agricultural and Waste Disposal Effects

Agriculture and plantations at Gagaifo and Vailele are concentrated in inland forest areas and have little impact on the coast and marine life compared to Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Because of limited flat land at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, plantations are mainly on the steep mountains. In the wet season rapid runoff occurs mainly at Ta’elefaga where the main road cuts through the mountains behind this village. As a result sedimentation exacerbated and the lagoon is usually murky and discoloured.

Household waste disposal was seen but was not a huge concern at the villages of study, however at Gagaifo, tins and plastics were discarded behind the committee house that is used for village functions. At Ta’elefaga the debris brought down by the Ta’elefaga River and small streams includes logs and sticks that village children collect for firewood, also tins and metals were found at some areas on the shore not only of this village but also of Ma’asina and Vailele.

5.12 MANAGEMENT IN THE STUDY VILLAGES

Conservation of marine resources is not a strong emphasis in these study villages. In the late 1980s marine reserves were planned at Ta’elefaga and other Fagaloa Villages according to respondents, to breed an introduced species of mussel shellfish but this effort was not initiated when the severe cyclones in 1990 and 1991 occurred.

At Gagaifo in the early 1990s a small family-owned business exported small coloured finfish to overseas aquariums. This was carried out for less than 5 years and in the year 2000 another family started exporting live corals, until the chiefs’ council finally banned this activity. The following year, Gagaifo Village participated in the Samoa Fisheries Project to establish a marine reserve but this failed in less than a year due to mismanagement, lack of commitment and probably the village council's decision-making problems. Currently at Gagaifo only a family-owned clam reserve on the western end of the village is regenerating giant clams.

These were the only efforts that took place at these villages and Vailele has not participated in any marine conservation efforts. These villages have complied with the laws imposed by the

146

government under the Fisheries Department in banning destructive methods of fishing like the use of dynamite, chemicals, poisonous plants and even the use of efficient methods like diving gear.

In enforcing these laws each village put forward their own by-laws or ways to fine and penalize individuals who participate in any illegal means of fishing. In this way the village chiefs’ councils play a huge role in the success or controlling over-fishing and destructive fishing. However, in some villages this is not the case as the councils are not active and many chiefs nowadays look for new ways to earn money with little emphasis on preserving their own environment and resources.

This research has observed that the village people particularly the young generation is losing traditional knowledge of coastal and marine species due to changes in lifestyle nowadays. This problem is not only growing in the urban areas but affecting the rural areas too. Management programmes should be applied to all social groups and children in villages to promote public awareness and especially to pass and deliver traditional knowledge to the young generation.

147

CHAPTER SIX GENERAL DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 INTRODUCTION

The coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity are fragile but vital for survival in Samoa. These areas are particularly susceptible to natural and human activities more so now that people increasingly depend on the marine resources to satisfy their needs within the cash economy.

Sadly, Samoa like many other developing island nations is trying to develop its economy and sometimes disregards the serious impacts these developments impose on its environment.

This thesis has attempted to explain how coastal and nearshore ecosystems are significant and discussed the main natural and human activities that severely affect these resources in four study villages in Samoa.

6.2 DISCUSSION AND CHANGES AFFECTING THE STUDY VILLAGES

The coast and nearshore areas provide the common resources that Pacific Island people use for their daily living. The coast is also used for settlement, farming/plantation and infra-structural development. Fisheries provide basic protein in people’s diet and an increasingly important source of cash income although nowadays many have turned to imported frozen and canned food especially tinned fish and corned beef.

The inshore lagoon is the main fishing ground of local communities that practice subsistence and artisanal fishing. At the study villages, artisanal fishing provides for consumption and sale of catches in the local market and within the villages to earn income that people use to buy other domestic necessities.

Tropical cyclones are the main natural hazards that cause serious destruction to the coast and marine resources of the Pacific. Cyclones Ofa in 1990 and subsequently Val in 1991 devastated the entire Samoa Islands and inflicted serious damage to both property and the environment, for

148

example coastal erosion and destruction of corals and reefs of the study villages. Chapter fourand five explained that at Ma’asina and Vailele much of their reef fronts were covered with coral rubble banks as a result of these previous cyclones.

The coasts of Vailele and Gagaifo had been seriously eroded also by cyclones Ofa and Val and common coastal plants such as the Pacific rosewood (milo), cerbera (leva) and the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a) had declined. Many other coastal plants also declined due to the expansion of settlements and had seen many of these plants being replaced by species like hibiscus, coconut, mango trees and planted ornamentals. The mangrove area at Ta’elefaga has been cut for firewood and disturbed by pigs and discarded rubbish thus similar problems occur at the small swamps at Vailele and Gagaifo Villages.

Littering and rubbish disposal mainly plastics and tins are now common in Samoa. Since many of the population settle along the coast, inappropriate rubbish disposal was observed and seen at the study villages, particularly the indiscrimint disposal of tins, metals and plastics.

Sand mining and dredging are critical in the Pacific Islands mainly in large-scale mining, as this has led to environment problems. Lal (1984) recorded that dredging and mining of sand in Fiji from the back reef of Laucala Bay lagoon may have contributed to the loss of the turtle grass (Syringodium isoetifolium) that led to the decline of fish in this area that depend on this seagrass for food. The mining operation at Mulinu’u in Apia, Samoa was suspected as the cause for the eradication of the sea hare (Dolabella auricularia) from this area (Bell, 1985 cited in Fellow and Taylor 1991). At the study villages, sand mining occurs on a small scale particularly at the villages of Vailele and Gagaifo for beautification purposes and in mixing cement for building houses.

The villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga have limited flatland and the population is concentrated on the narrow coastal zone, which is also used for plantations, roads and infra-structural development to improve communication and services. These include roads and also the hydro electricity power station located at Ta’elefaga village.

149

Agriculture on steep slopes and mountains at Fagaloa and the road that cuts through the high mountains increase surface runoff especially in the wet season. Furthermore, the small rivers and creeks at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga intensify soil erosion and sedimentation. The corals of Ta’elefaga are degraded and the lagoon is quite barren except near the reef, where corals exist but are also dying. Similar situations occur in other Pacific Islands for example in Guam, heavy sedimentation was recorded by Richmond et al. (2002), with a road project in the early 1990s on the southern coast that affected 10 km of fringing reefs killing all the corals.

Wastewater discharged from the power station at Ta’elefaga causes high sedimentation thus smothering and killing of corals, resulted in a murky lagoon, the decline and local extirpation of some marine species. Examples include the depletion of the sea hare (gau) and pen shells (fole), the rarity of venus clams (tugane), boring sea urchins (tuitui), sea cucumbers and the purse-eye scad fish (atule), which used to appear annually at Ta'elefaga, but have not been seen in the last three years. Fishing activities and yields clearly declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina due to impacts from the establishment of the hydro electricity power station.

The villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga used to depend much on marine resources for their daily consumption because Fagaloa District is isolated behind high mountains from the main transportation route to the urban area. Nowadays the road that cuts through the mountain going down to Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa Bay has been upgraded and people can easily travel to town. This assist people from Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in buying many of their necessities from town, especially frozen and tinned food that is becoming the common type of food these people consume.

In the study villages, commercial uses have led to the over-harvesting of particular marine species such as the giant clams, top shell, turbo, bêche-de-mer and some finfishes like the surgeonfish and unicornfish. At Vailele sea cucumbers, boring sea urchins and shellfish mainly pen shells are gathered not only for consumption but also for selling and they are increasingly in short supply. Similarly, as recorded by Sulu et al. (2002) in Fiji, the emperor species (Lethrinus)and mullet (Muligidae) have been over-fished whilst the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometopon)was fished to local depletion in most areas.

150

The fishers at the study villages were taking undersized finfish, crabs like the red spotted crab (k k ), lobsters (ula, papata) and giant clams (faisua). The giant clams were over-fished at these villages in the 1970s to the 1990s, similar to all areas of Samoa. Landings of giant clams, trochus, turbo, octopus, crabs and lobsters have now declined and rarely seen at the fish market in Apia Town. During the two months of this research, most of these species were not seen at the fish market during the time of observation. They were only seen but in fewer numbers in creel surveys in the study villages.

The common destructive and efficient fishing methods reported in the surveys included gill nets, cast nets and spear diving using torches for night fishing. Fixed gill nets are used at Ta’elefaga’s mangrove estuary to catch mangrove crabs. Furthermore, night crab fishers frequently collect mangrove crabs that, has contributed to the decline of this species. Gill and cast nets target undersized species. Species commonly caught by cast nets include mullets (anae), anchovies (sal ), goatfish (i’asina, vete) and rabbitfish (lo, pa’u’ulu) all of which are declining in abundance and size.

Myers (1989) and Sherwood (1993) in Dalzell et al. (1995) reported that the bumpheaded parrotfish and the napoleon wrasse (Chelinus undulates) were driven to very low population levels due to commercial spear fishing in Guam and Palau.

The lagoons of Gagaifo and Vailele are in better condition compared to Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga lagoons however the use of destructive fishing techniques needs to be managed, like reef gleaning at Vailele for subsistence and commercial needs. At Gagaifo collecting sea anemone (lumane, matalelei) for sale leads to coral breakage and a few fishers still use the illegal Derrismalaccensis (ava niukini) rotenone fish poison, which harms marine organisms and kills undersized fish.

Exportation of live corals and small coloured fish took place at Gagaifo in the late 1980s to the early 1990s and even the crown-of-thorns starfish outbreak that affected Samoa in the late 1970s to the early 1990s was a more serious problem at Gagaifo compared to the other study villages.

151

The annual rise of the palolo worm at Gagaifo and neighbouring Matautu Village became a rarityin the 1990s. According to the respondents of Gagaifo, these commercial activities and way of fishing in their lagoon have contributed to the scarcity of the palolo worm. In Tonga, Wenzel (1989) reported that black coral was over-harvested due to its uses and importance in the jewellery industry.

All these human activities in the Pacific and Samoa contributed to the degradation of Islands' coastal and nearshore biodiversity.

6.3 MANAGEMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS

Government agencies and non-governmental organizations in Samoa and other Pacific Islands are increasingly involved in conservation projects to preserve and sustainably manage nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

The Samoa Fisheries Project run by the Fisheries Division and funded by Australian aid developed fisheries management plans and established a system of community-based marine protected areas (MPA) in many villages throughout Samoa. During the fieldwork only Gagaifo Village from the four study villages participated in this conservation programme.

The village marine reserve at Gagaifo under the Fisheries Project failed within a year. This shows weak management by the village council (fono), which was quite unstable and even at the time of the field study the council broke into two parties. This indicates the significance of the local people’s roles. Even though the village council is a good system for running these kinds of programmes, it depends on how good and committed these people are in order for the project (or any project) to work.

In Samoa, the 1996 Fisheries Regulations included regulations concerning fishing practices, services and species. The Village Fono Bill 1990 bolstered the authority of village councils in managing the villages’ resources (Peteru, 1993). Village councils enforce their own by-laws as used in the Samoan Fisheries Project by participating villages (Ropeti, 2004).

152

It was observed during the field study that villagers lack the concern and awareness for the need to conserve their resources because many are trying to cope with the high cost of living by focusing on opportunities for cash income. A lot of people are desperate to find ways to earn money immediately and usually the fishers’ take even the undersized seafood and sell in their villages.

Subsistence fishing seemed to be reasonably sustainable but the increasing reliance on cash economies now have increased people’s demands, leading to greater commercial exploitation of coastal and nearshore resources. The offshore fisheries resources need to be exploited in order to minimize the heavy use of the lagoon as fishing grounds. However, fishing boats are quite expensive for many subsistence fishers.

People at Ma’asina and especially Ta’elefaga have complained about the hydro power station and its effects in their village but so far there is no alternative. In the village of Sili on Savai’i Island, a similar hydro dam project was proposed to the village council by the government. Environment non-government organizations (such as Siosiomaga Society) are now assisting the village council and people of Sili to use other alternative ways of using their fresh water resource to earn income, instead of a hydro dam.

6.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This research has shown that coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity are the most significant resources for the livelihood of the local people and the Pacific alike. Nevertheless people are using these resources at an accelerating rate as seen by the over-harvesting and over-fishing of species at the study villages. As a result many finfishes, shellfishes, crustaceans, sea cucumbers, sea hares and other species have drastically declined or have become depleted.

The dependence of the local people on the cash economy increase the use of destructive and efficient methods of fishing thus put pressure on the declining resources. This is a concern that if local communities continued to ignore these issues they will face major crises in the future concerning the coastal and marine limited resources.

153

Education, management projects and conservation sites are being proposed and are practiced nowadays in many Pacific Islands to deal with marine pollution, over-fishing, mangrove degradation, coastal erosion and other nearshore issues.

Development of partnerships by governments or agencies with donors/non-government organizations and local communities in initiating and carrying out conservation projects can provide a positive foundation for successful conservation. In Tuvalu, for instance, the mangrove restoration project supported by the Tuvalu Association of NGOs (TANGO) teaches women how to collect the dyes they use for handicraft without damaging fragile mangroves (AFAP Report, 2001).

The importance of coastal and nearshore marine resources as raised by this study points to the need to develop management and conservation models to sustain these ecosystems. Government officers interviewed pointed out how important it is to develop awareness and concern not only among government officials, agencies but mainly the local communities from elders to children in order for them to use their resources in a sustainable manner.

Communities need to be empowered to protect and manage their resources. Educating local communities is crucial to raise the awareness and concern of these people to manage their resources. Trainings, public awareness activities in the local language and encouraging the use of traditional knowledge can assist the local people to participate in conservation efforts. Including environmental resource management in the school curriculum is a significant long-term goal to sustain coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity.

Marine species that have become rare or declined have not been identified in many areas in Samoa; nor have the impacts of fishing activities and other uses of the nearshore ecosystems in most villages. This thesis has attempted to do so as a basis for better understanding of the critical importance and fragility of the nearshore coastal ecosystem and associated biodiversity to the people of Samoa. It also stresses the need for greater awareness as a basis for the evolution of more sustainable management and development alternatives for the benefit of future generations.

154

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, T., Dalzell, P. and Ledua, E. c.1998. Ocean resources. Accessed 5th April fromhttp://www.spc.org.nc/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/GEOGRAPHY/Ocean.htm

AFAP. 2001. AFAP 2000 – 2001 Program report. The Australian Foundation for the Peoples of Asia and the Pacific, Sydney.

Asian Development Bank, 2000. Samoa 2000: Building on recent reforms. Asian DevelopmentBank, Manila.

Andrew, G.J and Holthus, P.F. 1988. Marine environment survey: Proposed Aleipata IslandsNational Park, Western Samoa. Unpublished report for the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Barnabé, G. and Barnabé-Quet, R. 1997. Ecology and management of coastal waters: Theaquatic environment. Springer and Praxis Publising, Chichester.

Brodie, J. and Morrison, J. 1984. The management and disposal of hazardous wastes in the Pacific Islands. Ambio Journal 13 (5-6):331-335.

Brodie, J. E., Arnould, C., Eldredge, L., Hammond, L., Holthus, P., Mowbray, D. and Tortell, P.1990. State of the marine environment in the South Pacific Region. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies No. 127, 1990 and SPREP Topic Review No. 40, 1990. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Brown, B.E., 1986. Human induced damage to coral reefs. Unesco reports in marine science –Results of a regional Unesco (COMAR), Diponegoro University Jepara and National Institute of Oceanology, Jakarta.

Brown, R.P.C. and Walker, A. 1995. Migrants and their Remittances: Results of a householdsurvey of Tongans and Western Samoans in Sydney. Pacific Studies Monograph No. 17, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Bryant, D., Burke, L., McManus, J. and Spalding, M. 1998. Reefs at risk: A map based indicatorof the threats to world’s coral reefs. World Resource Institute, Washington D.C.

Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf/RaR.pdf

Burke, L., Kura, Y., Kassem, K., Revenga, C., Spalding, M. and McAllister, D. 2001. Pilot analysisof Global Ecosystems: Coastal ecosystems. World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.

Burne, R.V. 1991. Carbonate sediment budgets and coastal management in South Pacific IslandNations. In workshop on coastal processes in the South Pacific Island Nations, Lae, Papua New Guinea, 1 – 8 October, 1987. SOPAC Technical Bulletin 7:45-53, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva .

155

Central Bank of Samoa (CBS). 2004. Central Bank Bulletin. Accessed 5th August 2005 from http://www.cbs.gov.ws

Chase, R. and Veitayaki, J. 1992. Implications of Climate Change and Sea-level Rise forWestern Samoa. SPREP Reports and Studies Series No. 59. South Pacific Regional

Environment Programme, Apia.

Dalzell, P., Adams, T.J.H. and Polunin, N.V.C. 1995. Coastal fisheries in the Pacific Islands. First draft of artcle for the South Pacific Commission, Noumea. Accessed 5th April 2005 from

http://www.spc.int/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/CoastalFisheriesInPacific.pdf

Dalzell, P., Adams, T. and Farman, R. 1996. Status of Pacific Island coral reef fisheries. Paperpresented at 8th International Coral Reef Symposium, Panama, 1996. Accessed 5th

March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/statreef.htm

Department of Statistics. 1993. Report of the census of population and housing 1991. Government of Samoa’s Department of Statistics, Apia.

Eltayab, M.M. 2004. Review of the trochus fishery in Sudan. SPC Trochus Information Bulletin, No. 11. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

Fa’asili, U. and Taua, A. 2001. Review of the village fisheries management plans of the ExtensionProgramme in Samoa. SPC Field Report No.7. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

FAO. 1994. The role of agriculture, forestry and fisheries in the sustainable development.Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=docrep/T3384E/t3384e04.htm

____. 2000. The use of students in surveying subsistence fisheries – A Pacific Islandcase study. FAO fisheries circular No. 962. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

——. 2002. Pacific island fisheries: Regional and country information. RAP Publications 2002/13. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Bangkok. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/DOCREP/005/AC682E/ac68e05.htm

FAO and SPREP. 1996. Sustainable management of natural resources in the South Pacifictechnical consultation of the South Pacific small island developing states on sustainabledevelopment in agriculture, forestry and fishery. South Pacific Regional EnvironmentProgramme, Apia

Fellow, J.W. and Taylor, L.M. 1991. Western Samoa: An investigation into the sources andregulations of marine pollution. Samoa Lands and Survey and Environment Department, Apia.

156

Fisheries Division. 2003. Fisheries Division Annual Report: July 2002 – June 2003. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture, Forest, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Gangaiya, P. and Wele, I. 1994. Land-based pollution sources of the marine environment inWestern Samoa : a case study. SPREP reports and study series no.81. South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, Apia.

GESAMP (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution). 1990. The state of themarine environment. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies. No. 115. United Nations

Environment Programme, Nairobi.

Gillet, R. and Lightfoot, C. 2002. The contribution of fisheries to the economies of Pacific Islandcountries. Report prepared for the Asian Development Bank, the Forum Fisheries Agency and World Bank. Asian Development Bank, Manila. Accessed 4th March 2005 from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Contribution_Fisheries_Pacific_Economies/ contents.pdf

Gillie, R. D. 1992. Ranadi beach coastal erosion study Honiara, Guadalcanal Solomon Islands.SOPAC Technical Report 152. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

—— (ed.). 1994. Distinctive physical features of Pacific Island coastal zones. Proceedings of thefirst and second regional coastal protection meetings, Apia. SOPAC Miscellaneous

Report 177. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

Green, A. 1996. Status of the coral reefs of the Samoan Archipelago. Department of Marine and Wildlife, Pago Pago, American Samoa.

Hamnet, M.P. 1990. Pacific Islands resource development and environmental management. Chapter 16 in Beller, W., D’Ayala, P. and Hein, P. (eds). Sustainable development andenvironmental management of small Islands. Man and the Biosphere series, Vol. 5.United Nation Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Paris.

Hickey, F.R. and Johannes, R.E. 2004a. Evolution of village-based marine resource managementin Vanuatu between 1993 and 2001. Coastal region and small Island papers 15. United

Nation Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Paris: 48.

Hickey, F.R. and Johannes, R.E. 2004b. Recent evolution of village-based marine resourcemanagement in Vanuatu. SPC Traditional Resource Management and Knowledge

Information Bulletin. No. 14. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 05 March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/Trad/14/Trad14-hickey-johannes.htm

Hinrichsen, D. 1998. Coastal waters of the world: Trends, threats and strategies. Island Press,Washington D.C.

Howorth, R. 1983. Coastal erosion in Kiribati: Visit to South Tarawa 23 August – 8 September1983. CCOP/SOPAC Technical Report 31, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission,Suva.

157

Kaczynski, V. M. 2001. Integrative analysis of human impacts on oceans and coasts in the Asia- Pacific. Paper for proceedings at International seminar on population, markets and sustainability of the ocean and coastal resources: Perspectives of transition and developing economies of the Asia-Pacifc at the University of Pekin, Beijing, March 16, 2001.

Kay, E.A. 1999. Biogeography. In Rapaport, M. (ed). The Pacific Islands: Environment andSociety. The Bess Press, Honolulu: 76–92.

Kay, R.C. 1993. Assessment of coastal vulnerability and resilience to sea-level rise and climatechange: Case study – Upolu Island, Western Samoa. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Kear, D. and Wood, B.L. 1959. The geology and hydrology of Western Samoa. New ZealandDepartment of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington.

Kearney, R.E. 1976. A regional approach to fisheries management. 5th Pacific commission area,Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

King, M.G. 1991. Fisheries in the economy of the South Pacific. Institute of Pacific studies. University of the South Pacific, Suva.

——. 1995. Fisheries biology, assessment and management. Fishing News Books, London.

Kitalong, A.H. and Dalzell, P. 1994. A preliminary assessment of the status of the inshore coralreef fish stocks in Palau. Technical document No. 6, Inshore fisheries research project,

South Pacific Commission, Noumea. Accessed 6th May 2005 from http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:i8aeoCdcr0gJ:www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Contribution_Fisheries_Pacific_Economies/references.pdf+Kitalong+-+Dalzell&hl=en

Klinkhamers, P. 1992. Western Samoa: Land-based pollution sources and their effects on themarine environment. South Pacific Regional Evironment Programme, Apia.

Lal, N. 1984. Environmental implications of coastal development in Fiji. Ambio Journal Vol. 13 No. 5-6.

Lovell, E.R. and Toloa, F. 1994. Palolo deep national marine reserve: A survey and inventoryand information report. SPREP report and study series No.84. South Pacific Regional

Environmental Programme, Apia.

Lovell, E., Afzal, D., Deiye, M., Garrigue, C., Hughes, A., Pakoa, K., Poulasi, T., Sabetian, A., Samuelu, J., Solofa, A., Sulu, R., Sykes, H., Virly, S. and Wantiez, L. 2004. Status ofcoral reefs in the Southwest Pacific: Fiji, Nauru, New Caledonia, Samoa, SolomonIslands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 37-356. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2004-12.pdf

158

Maharaj, R.J. c.2001. Pacific islands at risk: Foreshore development and their vulnerability andimplications for adaptation strategies to climate change. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.survas.mdx.ac.uk/pdfs/3maharaj.pdf

Maiava, I.A., and Otobed, D.O. 1994. Republic of Palau: State of the Environment Report 1994.South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, Apia.

McCue, J. 2005. Coastal management into 2020: The risks to the tourism industry in the Pacific. Prepared paper for Tourism Investment Conference, February 2005, Fiji. Accessed 5th

April 2005 from http://www.profitpacific.com/site_en/partnership_meeting/presentation/ coastal_management.pdf

MNRE. 2000a. Samoa’s first report to the Convention of Biological Diversity. Ministry of NaturalResources and Environment, Apia.

——. 2000b. Environment Forum. Government of Samoa Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Apia.

Morton, J., Richards, M., Mildner, S. and Bell, L.J. 1989. The shore ecology of Upolu: Western Samoa. University of Auckland, Auckland.

Mulipola, A. 2002. Marine resources of Samoa. Prepared for Samoa’s National report for the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, July 2002. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Odum, W. E. 1976. Ecological guidelines for tropical coastal development. IUCN Publications New Series (42): 1–61.

Odyssey Expedition. 2001. Coral reef bleaching. Accessed 10th October 200e from http://www.odysseyexpeditions.org

Onorio, K and Tamata, B. 1997. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) report on theaugmentation phase of the Afulilo Hydro Power scheme in Samoa. SPREP report and studies series No.101. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Pearsall, S.H. and Whistler, W.A. 1991. Terrestrial ecosystem mapping for Western Samoa:Summary project report and proposed national parks and reserve plans. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Petersen, E. and Prestes, M.2000. Rethinking fisheries policy in the Pacific. Resourcemanagement in Asia-Pacific working paper No. 39. Resource management in Asia-

Pacific Program Research school for Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra.

Peteru, C. 1993. Environmental legislation review: Western Samoa. South Pacific RegionalEnvironment Programme (SPREP), Apia.

159

Pillai, G. and Sirikolo, M. Q. 2001. Mangroves of the Solomon Islands. Marine Studies Technical Report 2001/01, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

Purcell, S., Gardner, D. and Bell, J. 2002. Developing optimal strategies for restocking sandfish: acollaborative project in New Caledonia. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin No. 16. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

Quarrie, J.(ed.). 1992. Earth Summit 1992: The United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment, Rio de Janeiro. The Regency Press Corporation, London.

Richmond, B. 1991. Coastal morphology, shoreline stability, and nearshore mineral resources ofUpolu, Western Samoa. CCOP/SOPAC Technical report no.90. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

Richmond, R., Birkeland, A., Davis, G., Edward, A., Emaurois, C., Golbuu, Y., Graig, P., Green, C., Gutierrez, J., Houk, P., Ideochong, N., Kelty, R., Maragos, J., Paulay, G., Starmer, J., Tafileichig, A., Tianni, M. and Velde, N.V. 2002. Status of the coral reefs in Micronesia and American Samoa: US affiliated and freely associated Islands in the Pacific. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed). Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 217–236. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-12.pdf

Ropeti, E. 2004. An overview of the community/village-based fisheries management programmein Samoa: Community-based fisheries management programme training for Tokelau andAmerican Samoa, 3 – 9 March 2004, Apia. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture,

Forest, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Sadovy, Y. 2005. Humphead wrasse listed on CITES. SPC Live reef fish information Bulletin No. 13. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 5th March 2005 fromhttp://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/LRF/lrf.htm

Salvat, B. 2002. Status of southeast and central Pacific coral reefs ‘Polynesia Mana Node’: Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Kiribati, Niue, Tokelau, Tonga, Wallis and Futuna. In C.R. Wilkinson (ed) Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 203–215.Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-11.pdf

Scott, D. A. (ed.) 1993. A directory of wetlands in Oceania. International Waterfowl and Wetlands Research Bureau (IWRB), Slimbridge, U.K. and Asian Wetland Bureau (AWB), Kuala Lumpur. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.wetlands.org/inventory&/OceaniaDir/Contents.htm

Shearwood, A. and Howorth, R. (eds). 1996. Coasts of Pacific Islands. SOPAC MiscellaneousReport 222, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

160

Skelton, P. A., Bell, J.L., Mulipola, A. and Trevor, A. 2000. The Status of the Coral Reefs andMarine Resources of Samoa. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_google.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_WSM.pdf

Solomon, S.M. 1994. A review of coastal processes and analysis of historical coastal change inthe vicinity of Apia, Western Samoa. SOPAC Technical report 208. South Pacific Applied

Geoscience Commission, Suva.

SOPAC and SPREP. 1994. Coastal protection in the Pacific islands: Current trends and futureprospects. SOPAC Miscellaneous Publication No. 177. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

SOPAC. 2003. Coastal management. Accessed 5th September 2004 fromhttp://wwww.sopac.org.fj/secretariat/MemberCountries/ws/csd.html

South, G.R., Skelton, P., Veitayaki, J., Resture, A., Carpenter, C., Pratt, C. and Lawedrau, A. 2004. Pacific Islands, GIWA Regional assessment 62. University of Kalmar, Kalmar, Sweden. Accessed 5th April 2005 from

http://www.giwa.net/areas/reports/r62/giwa_regional_assessment_62.pdf

SPREP. 1994a. Western Samoa: NEMS – National environment and development managementstrategies. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1994b. Assessment of coastal vulnerability and resilience to sea-level rise and climatechange: case study-Yasawa Islands, Phase II. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1995. Report of the fourth meeting on the regional marine turtle conservation programme.South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1996. International coral reef initiative (ICRI) Pacific region strategy. South PacificRegional Environmental Programme, Apia.

——. 2003. Conservation management. Accessed 10th December 2004 fromhttp://www.sprep.org.ws/topic/marine.htm

Statistical Services. 2001. 2001 Census of population and housing: A special release of censusselected tabulations. Government of Samoa Treasury Department, Apia.

Sulu R., C. Hay, P. Ramohia and M. Lam., 2000. The Coral Reefs of Solomon Islands. GlobalCoral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_SLB.pdf

161

Sulu, R., Cumming, R., Kumar, L., Lober, M., Mulipola, A., Pakoa, K., Poulasi, T., Sauni, S., Wantiez, L. 2002. Status of Coral Reefs in the Southwest Pacific Region to 2002: Fiji, Nauru, New Caledonia, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed.). Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. GCRMN Report, Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 181-201. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-10.pdf

Suluvae, E.A. 2000. Environmental change of selected mangrove areas in Samoa. In Taulealo, T.I and Wulf, V. (eds). Samoa: Environment forum – Proceedings of the National

environment forum 2000. No.2. Minitry of Natural Resources and Environments, Apia: 7–10.

Taulealo, T.I. 1993. Western Samoa: State of the environment report. South Pacific RegionalEnvironment Programme, Apia.

Thaman, R.R.1989. Coastal reforestation and agroforestry as immediate ameliorative measuresto address global warming and to promote sustainable habitation of low-lying and coastalareas. University of the South Pacific, Suva.

____. 1994. Land, plants, animals and people: Community-based biodiversity conservation(CBBBC) as a basis for ecological, cultural and economic survival in the Pacific Islands.

Pacific Science Association Information Bulletin, Vol. 46, No. 1-2, April/June: 1–20.

Thaman, R.R., Morrison, J., Morrell, W.J. and Thaman, B. 2003. Wasted Islands? Waste and theneed for integrated waste management in the Pacific Islands: Current status and prospects for reduction and safe disposal. Paper presented at the Barbados Plan of Action+ Management of Experts on waste management in small Island Developing States (SIDS), Havana, Cuba, 27 Oct – 1 Nov, 2003. Accessed 4th May 2005 from http://www.sidsnet.org/docshare/other/20031105164530_WASTED_ISLANDS_Draft_Thaman_et_al._for_CD_28.10.03.doc.

Treasury Department, 2002. Strategy for the development of Samoa 2002–2004: Opportunitiesfor All. Government of Samoa Treasury Department Economic Policy and Planning

Division, Apia.

Trianni, M.S. 2002. Summary of data collected from the sea cucumber fishery on Rota,Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin No. 16. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

UNDP. 1999. Pacific human development report 1999 : Creating opportunities. United NationsDevelopment Programme, Suva.

UNDP and FAO. 1993. Samoa: Fisheries resources assessment for management. Food andAgricultural Organization, Rome.

162

UNEP. 1996. Asia-Pacific Environment Outlook – Chapter 1: Emerging Issues – Marine andcoastal environments. Accessed 4th May 2005 from http://www.rrcap.unep.org/apeo/Chp1g-marine.html

UNESCAP. 2000. Review of the state of the environment of the Pacific Islands. Accessed 4th

April 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/mced2000/pacific/Soe-pacific.htm

____. 2003a. Fishery resources development in Samoa. Accessed 4th April 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/drpad/publication/integra/modalities/samoa...

——. 2003b. Environmental implications of growth and development in Suva. Accessed 4th

October 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/drpad/publication/integra/wolume2/fiji/2fjo...

Uthicke, S. and Conand, D. 2005. Local examples of beche-de-mer overfishing: An initialsummary and request for information. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin, No.21.

Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 05 March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/BDM/21/Uthicke-Conand.pdf

Va’a, L.F. 2001. Saili matagi: Samoan migrants in Australia. Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific, Suva and National University of Samoa, Apia.

van Pel, H. 1960. Report on the sea fisheries of Western Samoa. South Pacific Commission, Noumea.

Veitayaki, J. 1995. Fisheries development in Fiji: The quest for sustainability. Institute of PacificStudies and Ocean Resources Management Programme, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

Viles, H. and Spencer, T. 1995. Coastal problems: Geomorphology ecology and society at thecoast. Edward Arnold, London.

Vuki, V., Naqasima, M and Vave, R. 2000. Status of Fiji's Coral Reefs. Global Coral ReefMonitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Accessed April 15th 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_FJI.pdf

Wenzel, L. 1989. Environment and change in the Pacific: A survey of resource use and policy inFiji, Tonga, W.Samoa, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands. Institute of Natural Resources Environmental Studies Report, No. 43. University of the South Pacific, Suva

Whistler, W.A. 1996. Samoan herbal medicine: O la’au ma vai fofo o Samoa. Isle Botanica, Honolulu.

Whistler, W.A. 2002. The Samoan Rainforest: A guide to the vegetation of the SamoanArchipelago. Isle Botanica, Honolulu.

163

World Bank, c.2001. Chapter 2: Managing coastal areas. Accessed 5th April 2005 fromhttp://www.siteresources.worldbank.orgIN

WWF. 2002. Conserving marine biodiversity in Fiji. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.wwfpacific.org.fj/marineresources

Zann, L.P. 1983. Traditional management and conservation of fisheries in Kiribati and Tuvalu.Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

____. 1991. The Inshore Resources of Upolu, Western Samoa: Coastal Inventory AndFisheries Database. Unpubl. Report 5. FAO/UNDP Project, No.5. Sam/89/002.

____. 1999. A new (old) approach to inshore resources management in Samoa. Ocean andCoastal Management, 42: 569–590.

____. 2000. State of the marine environment report for Australia: Technical summary. Ocean Rescue 2000, Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra.

Zann, L. P. and Bolton, L. 1985. The distribution, abundance and ecology of the blue coralHeliopora corulea (Pallas) in the Pacific. Coral Reefs, 4:125–134.

Zann, L.P. and Mulipola, A. 1995. The inshore resources of Western Samoa database: Coastalinventory and fisheries. Paper prepared for the SPC/FFA workshop on Management of

inshore fisheries, 26 June – 7 July.

164

APPENDIX Ia - Field work guide

TASKS:

1. Record the number of fishers (men/women) visible from the shore (every 2nd hour of the day).

2. Interview returning fishers to find out what they caught etc. 3. Interview village households to find out: -

- fish importance to them (consumption/commercial) - if they went fishing yesterday/night

RECORDING THE NUMBERS OF FISHERS/OBSERVE COASTAL ACTIVITIES – FORM 1

Select a part of the shore which gives the best view of the lagoon and reef. Record the number of canoes or fishers seen fishing on the lagoon or on the shore every 2nd hour of daylight (e.g. 6am, 8am, 10am, … to 6pm) Record what they were doing (e.g. crab fishing, netting, spearing, collecting shells, traveling to outer reef for fishing, FORM 1). Observe/record other human activities on the shore/coast apart from fishing.

INTERVIEWING FISHERS ON THEIR RETURN FROM FISHING TRIPS – FORM2

Meet the fishers as they land their catch. Try and interview at least 6 each day. (One form for each fisher). Identify the type of fish, crab, shells etc and bundles or bottles of sea weeds, jellyfish, sea etc. For those fishing at night – interview in the morning.

HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEWS/SURVEY – FORM 3

Sampling: Large villages (e.g. 50 or more households) sample about 20. Small villages (e.g. 30 or less households) sample 5 to 10. Try and sample a cross-section of households (i.e. different classes, economic groups) but in a random way. E.g. you might walk down a village road and pick every 5th house. Who to see/interview: Best to talk to the household cook/wife rather than the fisherman for she/he will know what was actually eaten.

165

APPENDIX Ib

FORM 3 – HOUSEHOLD FISH CONSUMPTION/EFFORTS AND IMPORTANCE

1. Village:_________________________________________________________ 2. Occupation of head of household______________________________________ 3. How many people in thehousehold:____________________________________ 4. How many in the household that are formally employed/work?______________ 5. How many people that fish in the household:____________________________ 6. How many times/days of the week that the household consume fish:__________ 7. Did the household consume fish yesterday?_____________________________ 8. What kinds/names of fish consumed?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9. Did the household consume shellfish yesterday? What kinds of shellfish? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10. Where did the fish and shellfish consumed come from? Purchased/Captured________________________________________________

11. How many members of the household that went fishing yesterday? ________________________________________________________________

12. How long did they spend fishing? (hrs) ________________________________________________________________

13. How did they fish? Canoe, line, gillnetting, diving, reef collecting, outboard, other.________________________________________________________________And where did they fish? Reef, lagoon, mangrove/muddy shore, open sea. ________________________________________________________________When? Day/Night (time)____________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________14. What kinds/names of fish commonly caught by the household fishers? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________15. What shellfish commonly collected by the household? ___________________________________________________________________16. Do you sell/give away or eat all the catch? Please explain. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________17. Please explain the main problems regarding the coast, reefs and fisheries in this

area. ___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

166

APPENDIX Ic

FORM 2 – INTERVIEWS WITH THE FISHERS (Creel survey)

1. DATE: __________________ 2. TIME: __________________ 3. GENDER: _______________ 4. How many people in the fishing group_____________________________________ 5. When did they go fishing? Start_________________ End__________________ 6. Where did they fish? Shore, Inner lagoon, outer lagoon, reef, open seas? ______________________________________________________________________7. Fishing methods. Crab nets,number/set________________________________ Gill net______________________________________________________________ Cast net_____________________________________________________________ Hand collecting_______________________________________________________ Spearing_____________________________________________________________ Diving______________________________________________________________ Hook and line________________________________________________________ Other methods________________________________________________________ 8. What did they catch? Type of fish/shellfish (no. of each) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________9. What will happen to the catch? All eaten by the aiga; Some given away; Some sold; All sold. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

167

APPENDIX Id

FORM 1 – FISHING AND COASTAL ACTIVITIES

TODAY’S DATE (Aso):__________________________________________________ TIME (Taimi):__________________________________________________________ FISHING ACTIVITIES (No. of canoes, fishers, types of fishing): No. of canoes (numera/aofai o vaa fagota): ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________No. of fishers (aofai o tagata fagota/aufaifaiva): __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Types of fishing (ituaiga faigafaiva): _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Other human activities on the shore/coast (isi gaioiga I le gataifale/matafaga): ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

168

APPENDIX Ie

HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS AND BIODIVERSITY: Taelefaga and Maasina Villages (Fagaloa Bay) and Vailele Village

GROUP NAME _______________________ VILLAGE ______________________ DATE _______

A. COASTAL VEGETATION USES

1. List down the 10 most important coastal plants found in the village (list according to importance). Oa laau taua e 10 tu-matafaga I totonu o lo outou nuu? 1__________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 2 _________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 3 ________________________________________ 8 _________________________________________ 4 ________________________________________ 9_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 10 ________________________________________

2. List down the uses of these plants named above. How often do you use them and for what purposes? Oa aoga o nei laau sa ta’ua. E faaaoga soo pe leai nei laau ae mo a o latou faaaogaina? Plant1 uses:___________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes__________________________________________________________________________

Plant 2 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 3 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 4 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 5: ______________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 6 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 7 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 8 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 9 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

169

Plant10 uses: _________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

3. Name the coastal plants, which are now extinct or rare and the reasons why they have been extinct or rare. Oa laau tu-matafaga ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________

4. What other organisms that depend on these plants for habitat? Are they rare/extinct? Explain why. Oa isi meaola/manu e nonofo I nei nofoaga tu-matafaga? Faamatala pe o maua pea nei manu (pe o tele pea lo latou aofai pe leai poo ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________

5. Explain the main impacts humans have on these coastal plants. Are there any management strategies that are used to maintain or conserve these plants and to be done by whom? Faamatala poo a aafiaga matuia e mafua mai I tagata o loo aafia ai laau tu-matafaga. Pe o iai fuafuaga ma ni gaioiga e faasaoina ai nei laau tu-matafaga ae o ai e faatinoina nei fuafuaga?

Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

B. MARINE RESOURCES AND USES

6a. Name 20 important reef and nearshore large finfish caught by fishers for sale or local consumption (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa I’a taua e 20 lapopoa o loo fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo e faatau atu ma maua mai ai tupe?

1__________________________________ 11_________________________________________ 2__________________________________ 12_________________________________________ 3__________________________________ 13_________________________________________ 4__________________________________ 14_________________________________________ 5__________________________________ 15_________________________________________ 6__________________________________ 16_________________________________________ 7__________________________________ 17_________________________________________ 8__________________________________ 18_________________________________________ 9__________________________________ 19_________________________________________ 10_________________________________ 20_________________________________________

170

6b. Name 6 reef and nearshore large finfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What action that can be done and by whom? Oa I’a taua e 6 lapopoa I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga e tatau ona fai pe o faia e faasao ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina nei gaioiga? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

7a. Name 20 important reef and nearshore small finfish caught by fishers for sale or local consumption (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa I’a taua e 20 laiti o loo fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo e faatau atu ma maua mai ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 11 _______________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 12_______________________________________ 3 _________________________________________ 13 _______________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 14_______________________________________ 5__________________________________________ 15_______________________________________ 6_________________________________________ 16_______________________________________ 7_________________________________________ 17_______________________________________ 8_________________________________________ 18_______________________________________ 9_________________________________________ 19_______________________________________ 10________________________________________ 20_______________________________________

7b. Name 6 reef and nearshore small finfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What action that can be done and by whom? Oa I’a laiti e 6 e fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom__________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

171

4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________5 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

8a. Name the 6 most important coastal and reef sharks caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village. Oa malie taua e 6 e faagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi e maua ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 4________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 6________________________________________

8b. Name 3 sharks that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa malie e 3 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9a. Name 4 important coastal and rays caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa fai e 4 o fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi ma maua mai ai tupe 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

9b. Name 2 nearshore rays that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom.Oa fai se 2 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

172

10a. Name 8 eels caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pusi taua e 8 o fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi ma maua mai ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

10b. Name 4 eels that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa pusi e 4 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

11a. List the three (3) most important sea snakes known by people in the village.

1______________________ 2____________________ 3______________________

11b. List one (1) type of sea snake that is now rare, extinct or in short supply; the reasons it is rare, extinct or in short supply; and the actions that need to be taken to protect or re-establish it. What can be done and by whom? 1___________________________ The reasons it is rare, extinct or in short supply___________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

12a. Name 4 octopus and squids caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa fe’e ma gufe’e e taua e 4 e fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatauatu foi ma maua mai ai tupe. 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

12b. Name 2 octopus and squids that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa fe’e ma gufe’e se 2 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

173

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

13a. What are 8 baitfish used by the fishers. Oa I’a e 8 e faaaoga mo maunu? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

13b. List down 4 baitfish that are now rare or become extinct and actions to manage and revive these and to be done by whom?Oa I’a maunu e 4 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi? O iai ni gaioioga/fuafuaga e taumafai e tae maua ai pe faasao nei I’a maunu? Ae o ai e faatinoina nei gaioiga/fuafuaga?

1__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

14a. List 8 important large reef and nearshore shellfish caught by fishers for sale and for consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa figota taua lapopoa e 8 o fagotaina mai le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa poo faatau atu foi?

1_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8 ________________________________________

14b. List 4 large reef and nearshore shellfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa figota lapopoa e 4 e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons__________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________

174

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

15a. List 8 important small reef and nearshore shellfish caught by fishers for sale and for consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa figota taua laiti e 8 o fagotaina mai le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa poo faatau atu foi?

1_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8 ________________________________________

15b. List 4 small reef and nearshore shellfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa figota laiti e 4 e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

16a. Name important crabs caught by fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pa’a e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

16b. Name important crabs that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa paa e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

175

17a. Name important lobsters caught by fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pa’a e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

17b. Name important lobsters that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa ulasami e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

18a. Name 8 reef and nearshore holothurians/sea cucumbers caught for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa loli/maisu e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

8b. Name 4 sea cucumbers that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa loli/maisu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________

19a. Name 4 reef and coastal sea urchins caught by the fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa tuitui e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

176

19b. Name 2 sea urchins that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa tuitui e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

20a. Name 4 reef and coastal sea stars/starfish found in the village. Oa aveau e maua I lo outou gataifale? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________ 20b.Name 2 sea stars/starfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa aveau e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

21a. Name 4 jellyfish that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa alualu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

21b. Name 2 jellyfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa alualu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

22a. Name 4 sea anemones that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa lumane/matamalu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

22b. Name 2 sea anemone that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa lumane/matamalu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________Reason______________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

177

23a. Name 4 sea weeds that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa limu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

23b. Name 2 sea weeds that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa limu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

24a. Name 4 sea slugs that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa gau/gaupapa e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

24b. Name 2 sea slugs that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa gau/gaupapa e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

25. List 2 types of sea worms caught by people in the village. Which are rare or extinct and why. What can be done to manage these and by whom. Oa anufe sami e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1__________________________________ Reasons______________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________ Reasons___________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________

26. Name the plant poisons or other kind of poisons that are used for fishing finfish. Are these allowed or not in the country/village. What actions impose to control these and done by whom? Oa laau o’ona ma isi ituaiga vai oona e faaaogaina I faigafaiva? E faatagaina e le malo poo le nuu ia faigafaiva? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e taumafai e faasao ai ia I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________

178

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 6___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

27a. List 8 coastal and sea birds seen in the village. Oa manu ma meaola se 8 e nonofo I nofoaga tu- matafaga o loo I lo tou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

27b. List 4 coastal and sea birds that are rare or now extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa manu ma meaola se 4 e nonofo I nofoaga tu- matafaga ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ai ia meaola ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

28. What kind of fishing that various village people are involved in? (e.g. shellfish fishing). Oa ituaiga faigafaiva e faatinoina e tagata eseese I totonu o lo outou nuu?

1. Old men, chiefs/matai_________________________________________________________________ 2. Old women/chiefs’ wives______________________________________________________________ 3. Untitled men/aumaga_________________________________________________________________ 4. Young women/aualuma_______________________________________________________________ 5. Children___________________________________________________________________________

179

29. List the social and economical uses of corals and sand to the village people. Are these resources exploited or not. What management plans to maintain these resources? Oa aoga ma faaaogaina o le oneone ma amu e le tou nuu? Oa fuafuaga ma gaioiga o loo faaaogaina e faaaoga tatau ai nei mea taua?

1. Coral uses________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2. Sand uses___________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

30. List two (4) types of coral that are now rare, extinct or in short supply; the reasons why; and the actions that need to be taken to protect or re-establish these hard corals. Oa amu ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ia amu o le gataifale?

1___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

31a. Explain the 5 most destructive fishing techniques that affect the marine ecosystem. What can be done and by whom. Oa faigafaiva se 5 e matua’I faatamaia ai I’a ma meaola o le sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ina ia faasaoina ai ma foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

180

31b. Explain the 5 most destructive fishing techniques that affect the coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom. Oa faigafaiva se 5 e matua’I faatamaia ai le gataifale (laau ma meaola tu-matafaga? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ina ia faasaoina ai ma foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

32. Explain other coastal and nearshore marine resources that people use (handicraft or others) and are these resources in the abundant or in short supply? Oa nisi mea aoga mai le gataifale e faaaogaina e tagata? O tumau pea pe ua tau le toe maua ia mea aoga taua? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

33. Explain 6 main impacts of farming/agriculture on finfish. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga taua se 6 o faatoaga o aafia ai I’a? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom_______________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

181

34. Explain 6 main impacts of farming/agriculture on shellfish. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga taua se 6 o faatoaga o aafia ai figota? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

35. Explain impacts of agriculture on other marine organisms/resources. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga o faatoaga o aafia ai nisi meaola se ono (6) o le gataifale/sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

36. Explain 4 main household impacts/waste on finfish. What can be done and by whom. Faamatala mai ni aafiaga se fa e afua mai otaota mai aiga ma laoa o loo aafia ai I’a o le sami. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

182

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

37. Explain 4 main household impacts/wastes on shellfish. What can be done and by whom? Faamatala mai ni aafiaga se fa (4) e afua mai otaota mai aiga ma laoa o loo aafia ai figota o le sami. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by who____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

38. Explain household impacts/wastes on other marine organisms/resources and the coastal ecosystem. What can be done and by whom. Oa aafiaga e afua mai otaota I maota ma laoa o aafia ai isi meaola o le gataifale/sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

39. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (roads) have on the nearshore marine and the coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom? Oa ni aafiaga of auala o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

183

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

40. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (seawall) have on the nearshore marine and coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom? Oa ni aafiaga o taligalu o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

41. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (dam) have on the marine resources. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga o le afi/hydro-power I Afulilo o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina? 1_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

184

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ 6_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

42. Name nearshore marine species that are rare or become extinct after the implementation of the dam. Explain how. What strategies used/done and by whom? Oa meola/I’a o le sami ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi talu ona fausia le afi I Afulilo? Oa ni gaioiga e mafai ai ona foia ia faafitauli ma faasaoina ia meaola? Ae o ai e faatinoina ia fuafuaga?

1. Finfish/explain______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Shellfish/explain_____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Others/explain_______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Coastal environment/plants/animals________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

43. Explain traditional management plans, rules and taboos used or are practiced for conservation of marine and coastal ecosystems and biodiversity.Faamatala pe oa ni gaioiga, tulafono, tapu faa-samoa sa iai sa/ma ona puipuia ai le gataifale (coast/marine). ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 44. Explain punishments impose by the village on individuals concerning the rules and taboos on marine resource managements. Faamatala ni faasalaga e faasala ai I latou e solia ia sa ma tulafono a le nuu e faatatau I le gataifale. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

45. Explain how the government and NGOs are supporting the people in managing their coastal ecosystems and marine resources? Faamatala pe o iai ma e faapefea foi ona fesoasoani le malo ma isi ofisa o siosiomaga I le tou nuu ma ona tagata I le faasaoina ma le vaaia lelei o le gataifale. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

185

APPENDIX II – LIST OF SPECIES

Coastal plants identified as important by respondents at the study villages

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name TreesFau Beach hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceusFutu Fish-poison tree Barringtonia asiaticaNiu Coconut Cocos nuciferaMilo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populneaTalie Tropical almond Terminalia samoensis

Terminalia catappaFetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllumPu’a Chinese-lantern tree Hernandia nymphaeifoliaLeva Cerbera Cerbera manghasGatae Coral tree Erythrina variegataIfi Tahitian chestnut Inocarpus fagiferFu’afu’a Guest tree Kleinhovia hospitaFao Neisosperma Neisosperma oppositifoliumTogo Oriental mangrove or

Red mangrove Bruguiera gymnorrhizaRhizophora mangle

Pulu Indian banyan? Ficus benghalensisPualulu Pua Fagraea berteroanaIfilele Intsia bijugaTausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argenteaMati Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabraPu’a vai Pisonia Pisonia grandisLama Candlenut Aleurites moluccanaShrubsLala Dendrolobium umbellatumNonu Indian mulberry Morinda citrifoliaFisoa Colubrina asiaticaFasa/laufala Screwpine Pandanus tectoriusTi Ti plant Cordyline fruticosaAloalo tai/suni-a –tai Beach privet Clerodendrum inermeAteate Beach sunflower Wollastonia bifloraPaogo Pandanus Pandanus turritusLaau failafa Candlebush Senna alataAloalo Premma Premna serratifoliaGau Island myrtle Alyxia stellataLaumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australisNamulega Beach vitex Vitex trifoliaMasame Glochidion ramiflorumVines/WeedsFue sina Beach pea Vigna marinaFue moa Beach morning glory Ipomoea pes-capraeTifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloidesTogotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiaticaFernsLau auta Scented fern Phymatosorus grossus

186

Marine species identified by respondents at the study villages

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Large finfishes Anae Mullet Valamugil spp.

Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscusMugil cephalus

Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinus amboinensis/olivaceusLaea Parrotfish Scarus spp.SapoanaeMalauli/Ulua

Trevallies Caranx spp.,Uraspis secundaCarangoides spp.

Ume Unicornfish Naso spp.Galo H/Parrotfish Scarus gibbus??Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp.Mat mu/Mu matavaivai Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculusMalatea/Tagafa Humphead maori wrasse Cheilinus undulatesPalani >15cm Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp.Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicusUlapo Parrotfish Hipposcarus longicepsAta’ata

Gatala moana

Grouper Coral trout P/grouper

Epinephelus septemfasciatusPlectropomus leopardusCephalopholis argus

Taiva Onespot Snapper Lutjanus monostigmaMala’i Humpback snapper Lutjanus gibbusMalava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteusA’u/Ise Long-tom Platybelone argalus platyuraMu Twinspot red snapper Lutjanus boharGanue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp.Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatusSumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistes flavimarginatusSaosao Great barracuda Agrioposphyraena barracudaAva Milkfish Chanos chanosAli Flounder Samariscus triocellatusFiloa-muFiloa

Emperors Gymnocranius spp.Lethrinus spp.

Moana Goatfish Parupeneus spp.Sapat Barracudas Sphyraena spp.Papa Lunartail Cod Variola loutiUme aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptusPatagaloa Surge wrasse Thalassoma purpureumSmall Finfishes Alogo Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp.Manini Convict surgeonfish Acanthurus triostegusPone <15cm - Pala’ia-juveniles Bristle-toothed surgeonfish Ctenochaetus striatusFuga Parrotfish Scarus spp.Gatala Groupers/cod Epinephelus spp.Pa’u’ulu/kiko/Lo Rabbitfishes Siganus spp.Malau/tamalau Squirrelfishes

Soldierfishes

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

187

Tifitifi

Alosina

Butterfly fishes Chaetodon spp.Forcipiger spp.Hemitaurichthys polylepisHeniochus spp.

Tu’u’u

Tu’u’u/MamoMutu

Gregories

DamselfishesSergeant-majors Pullers

Pygoplites diacanthusPomacanthus imperatorAbudefdul spp.Amblyglyphidodon leucogasterStegastes spp.Chromis spp.

Mata’ele’ele Emperors Lethrinus spp.Lupo <8cm Jacks Carangidae

Seriola rivolianaScomberoides commersonianus

Aua 8-12cm Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

Vete/I’asinaMatulau/AfuluUla’oa

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyenaAtule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus

Decapterus spp.Matala’oa/Taiva Mala’i/Tamala

Black snapper Snappers

Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

Lalafi Maori wrasse Cheilinus spp.Ili’ilia <15cm Unicornfish Naso lituatusPa’umal Filefishes Amanses spp.Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthys quadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

Sal Samoan anchovy Stolephorus apiensisPinel (juveniles) Rabbitfish Siganus spp.Sugale Wrass Halichoeres hartzfeldii

Hemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodon meleagris

Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus anguillarisGatala Groupers/Cods Cephalopholis spp.

Plectropomus leopardus

188

Sue Puffers/Tobies Canthigaster spp.Arothron spp.

Tautu Porcupinefish Diodon spp.Ava’ava Terapon perch Terapon jarbuaTolo Flatheads Platycephalidae (5spp.)NofuSausauleleLa’otele

ScorpionfishLionfishReef stonefish

Scorpaenopsis cirrhosaPterois volitansSynanceia verrucosa

Mumu Ponyfishes

Goldline bream

Leiognathus spp.Gazza minutaGnathodentex aureolineatus

Igaga?Tivao

Tivao-sugale

Monocle bream Butterfly bream Whiptail

Scolopsis trilineatusNemipterus sp.Pentapodus sp.

Moamoa Trunkfishes/Boxfishes

Lactoria cornutaOstracion tuberculatumOstracium lentiginosum

Maogo White-spotted surgeonfish Acanthurus guttatusSharksMoemoeao/Miliga Black-tip reef sharks Nabrius ferrugineusMataitaliga Scalloped Hammerhead Sphyrna lewiniTa’aneva Spotted nurse shark Stegostoma fasciatumAso Mackerel shark Isurus oxyrinchusRaysFai pe’a Spotted eagle ray Aetobatis narinariFai pala? Coachwhip stingray Himantura fai?Fai malie Manta ray Manta birostrisFai gatae? Fai tala Blue spot Stingray Dasyatis kuhliiMoray eels & snakes Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosaPusi gatala/Maoa’e Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicusOnea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinusTafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax flavimarginatusI’aui Conger eel Conger cinereusAuvaeloloa Moray eel Enchelycore schismatorhynchusGatamea Snake eels Myrichthus spp.Gata sami/Galio Sea snake Pelamis platurusSoloalalo Sea snake LaticaudaLarge shellfish Faisua Clam Tridacna spp.Foafoa/Saosao? Triton trumpet shell Charonia tritonisPala’au Spider conch shells Lambis spp.Small shellfishPipiPipit

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

Sisi Freshwater and nerite snails Neritina and Nerita spp.Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomusAliao Top shell Tectus pyramisFole Pen shells Pinna spp.Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp.Pule Tiger cowry

CowryCypraea tigrisCypraea spp.

189

Pae Ark shell Anadara sp.Tapula’a Turban Turbo sp.Fatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus spp.Li Surf clam Atactodea striataMatapisu Limpets Patelloida sp., Cellana sp.Tio Rock oyster Crassostrea mordaxAsi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp.Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulusAsi’asi Scallop shell PectinidaeTifa Black-lip pearl oyster Pinctada margaritiferaPatupatu Vase shell VasidaeU’u Brown mussel Modiolus sp.Sea hares and Sea slugsGau Green sea hare Dolabella auriculariaGaupapa Sea slug OnchidiumMatefanau Sea hare Aplysia sp.Octopus and Squids Fe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp.Gufe’e Cuttlefish Sepia sp.Sea-cucumberFugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorataLoli Lollyfish

Blackfish Holothuria atraActinopyga miliaris

Greenfish Maisu Stichopus chloronatusMama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga mauritiana

Actinopyga echinitesNeti Curryfish Stichopus variegatesSea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulisSea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrensPeva synaptid Synapta maculataUlutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argusSea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaeiVaga Long spine urchin Diadema setosumSava’e/Satula Short-spine sea urchin Tripneustes gratillaOfaofa Heart urchin Brissus latecarinatus?Sea Stars Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigataAveau (fa’aatualoa) Serpent star Ophiocoma sp.Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicusAlamea Crown of thorn Acanthaster planciPalutu Pincushion star Culcita granulatusJellyfishAlualu Upside-down jellyfish Casseopea sp.Sea anemone Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp.Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp.SeaweedsLimu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvilleiLimu fuafua Seaweed/sea grape Caulerpa racemosaSea worms Atoaloa sami Giant bristle worm Eunice sp.Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridisMoloasi Boring peanut worm?

190

191

Ipo Peanut worm SiphonosomaaustraleCrabsAmaama Grapsid crab Grapsus sp.Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrataTutu/kuku Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatusVaevaeuli Black-claw reef crab Etisus sp.?Tupa Land/Beach crab Cardisoma carnifexMatamea Red-eye crab Eriphia sebanaU’a Red-claw land crab Sesarma erythrodactylaAvi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda ceratophthalmusTupu-o-pa’a? Pa’atala Spiny swimmer crab Thalamita sp

.Tapola Burrowing crab Calappa sp.

Coconut crab Birgus latroSa’esa’e Poisonous shawl crab Zozymus?

Ataula Fiddler crab Uca sp.Lobsters Ula Spiny lobsters Panulirus penicillatus

Panulirus sp.Panulirus versicolor

Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp.Ulavai Freshwater shrimp Macrobrachium lar

Palaemon sp.Stony corals Amu’amu/feofeo? Staghorn coral Acropora spp. (branching)Tu/Puga Massive coral Porites spp.Lapa Plate coral Acropora (tabulate)Punau Stinging/fire coral MilleporaAmu ula Red coral Stylaster

Pavona cactus?Solitary corals Fungia?Blue coral?

Soft corals AlcyonariaAmu galemulemu Sarcophyton trochiliophorum?

HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEMS ANDBIODIVERSITY

CASE STUDIES: VAILELE, GAGAIFOLEVAO, MA’ASINA AND TA’ELEFGAVILLAGES OF UPOLU ISLAND, SAMOA

by

Olof V. Tuaopepe Nise

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofMasters of Environmental Studies

Department of Geography Faculty of Islands and Oceans

The University of the South Pacific

December 2005

©Olof Tuaopepe 2005

D

I Olof V. Tuaopepe Nise declare that this thesis is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published, or substantially overlapping with material submitted for the award of any other degree at any institution, except where due acknowledge is made in the text.

Signed…………………………………….. Date……………………………………..

i

AC NO LEDGEMENTS

This work was made possible through the assistance and contribution of many people and agencies, and for these people I thank the Lord and may he continue to bless them all. I give my special thanks to all the following groups and individuals who provided materials and helped me to complete this work.

First, I give my sincere thanks to the villagers and respondents of Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina, Vailele and Gagaifolevao for their knowledge shared in which I am able to produce this thesis. I give my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to my thesis supervisor Professor Randy Thaman for his guidance, hard work and making his time available in helping me. Also I thank Professor Leon Zann for his assistance and in providing his useful resource materials to help my research.

I am grateful to the AusAID for the financial sponsorship that enables me to finish this study especially Rosalyn Morgan and Olita Nagera of the office in Suva for their assistance.

I thank the pulenu’u (mayors) of Vailele (Sale’upolu), Ma’asina (Togia) and Ta’elefaga (Gago) who helped with the organization in villages and liaising with the village councils. In particular, I give my sincere thanks to Gago, the pulenuu of Ta’elefaga, and his family for the accommodation and their hospitality in my two weeks in Fagaloa. Also I thank all the children who were my research assistances at these villages.

I would also like to thank the following individuals: Palepa Amosa, the Samoan student counselor at USP and her family for the assistance and support. I am thankful and acknowledge the great help of Tolu Muliaina for the kind words of encouragement, his knowledge shared and his family for everything.

I also acknowledge the assistance of: the CEO, Luagalau Foisaga Shon, and the people at the Internal Affairs Office in Apia that liaised with the village mayors and making my fieldwork process easier; the Assistant CEO, Atonio Mulipola and particularly Anama Solofa, La’ulu Sione of the Fisheries Division; the CEO, Tu’u’u Taulealo and especially Telesia Sila and Molly of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment for helping with my archival research.

ii

Thanks to Sera Matai’a, the Principal and staff of the Catholic Senior School for the resource materials I borrowed from their library.

My gratitude to Lui Bell of the Ministry of Natural Resource and Eteuati Ropeti of the Fisheries Division, who were available for the conducted interviews. I am grateful for the kind assistance of Mrs Barbara Hau’ofa for editing my write-up, Sharon McGowan and Sala Vakalala at USP; Laulu Dan Stanley at Catholic Senior School for the use of his camera; Karl Adams at iPasifika and Dan at CSL for the laptops renting assistance. I am also grateful to the generosity and help of Semi Lesa who provided and assisted me in modifying my research site maps and aerial photographs. Thanks also to Shirley Atatagi (Greenpeace), Fiu Mataese (CEO of Siosiomaga Society) and Rita Ale for the information on environment concerns. I also thank Br. Carl Tapp for his continued words of encouragement and for sharing his wisdom and experiences.

I am also thankful to my flat mates and friends during our studies in Suva: Makerita and her family - Imeleta and my little friend Arasi for the daily entertainment, Br. Siaosi, Sr. Imakulata, Moira, Monica, Sandra, Isamaeli and Elvie Tamata and her family. Thanks to my friends, Mary and Toi for running my errands in Samoa and also their families for the support. Thanks to all my friends and students for the e-mails or forwards. To all those I came in contact with during this work and unable to name you all, thank you very much.

Last but not the least I give my special thanks to my mother, siblings, cousins and also my aiga (family) in Lefaga and Malie for prayers and everything.

Faafetai tele lava

iii

D

This work is dedicated to the following people who inspired me and also struggled to provide the opportunities for the young generation in our family:

Tuaopepe Nise, Otila Sefo-Tuaopepe and Siainiusami Tuaopepe Sanerivi.

The coast of Gagaifolevao, Lefaga Bay at dusk

iv

ABSTRACT

The coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity provide fundamental resources for local communities of the Pacific Islands. The coast is the main area of settlement, agriculture and infra-structural development whilst the nearshore marine area is the main fishing ground of the Samoan, and other Pacific communities. Subsistence and artisanal fishing are significant in providing for the local people’s needs in substituting about half of their protein intake. Many activities along the coast and nearshore areas put pressure on resources such as coastal plants, sand and beaches as well as the inshore lagoon. Furthermore, the impacts of natural hazards like catastrophic cyclones exacerbate the destruction of these nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

This research assesses and discusses human impacts on the coasts and nearshore biodiversity of Samoa focusing on the four villages of Vailele near Apia and the rural villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa on the northeast coast and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga on the southwest coast of the Island of Upolu. Main human impacts at these areas include infra-structural development, particularly the Afulilo Dam that feeds the hydro-electricity power station at Ta’elefaga, which has caused the decline, scarcity and local depletion of some nearshore marine species. As a result, sedimentation into the lagoon has increased thus causing the death of more than half of the coral cover; eradication of the sea hare ( ) and pen shell ( ); the rarity of the finfish purse eye scad ( ), the sea cucumber - pricklyfish ( ), venus clam ( ) and the decline of the boring sea urchin ( ) and other species as explained in the results.

In addition, high demand contributes to the over- harvesting of marine organisms resulting in the short supply of important species for consumption and sale, for example finfish, molluscs, echinoderms and crustaceans. Over-fishing has led to the decline of particular species such as the unicornfish ( ) at Gagaifolevao and Vailele, the steephead parrotfish ( ) and the humphead maori wrasse ( ) at the four study sites. Destructive fishing methods were used such as the fish poison tree ( ) and the Derris malaccensis ( ). The coral smashing ( ) method of fishing caused the decline of the gregory finfish ( ) at Vailele and the breaking of corals is still used to fish for sea anemone ( , ) at Gagaifolevao for selling in the village or at the market in town.

Findings also from this research showed that cyclones were the main natural disasters that devastated the coastal and nearshore biodiversity of the study villages, particularly cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991, which deposited Island rubble banks on the reefs of Vailele and Ma'asina. One of the main problems encountered during the research was identifying vernacular names of some marine and plant species. This limitation and lack of traditional knowledge was mainly with the young age groups interviewed. The severe impacts affecting the coastal and nearshore areas and the loss of traditional knowledge as found out by this research need to be addressed. The involvement of local communities in conserving their resources will bolster their participation and concern and thus develop their sense of responsibility in sustainable management of their nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

v

TABLE OF CONTENT

Declaration of Originality i Acknowledgements ii Dedication iv Abstract v List of Tables ix List of Figures xiii List of Abbreviations xvii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT 6 1.3 HYPOTHESIS 7 1.4 OBJECTIVES 7 1.5 USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY 7 1.6 SELECTION OF RESEARCH TECHNIQUES 9 1.7 SELECTION OF STUDY VILLAGES 9 1.8 METHODOLOGY AND RECONNAISSANCE VISITS 10

1.8.1 Literature and Archival Research 11 1.8.2 Field Survey Methods and Analyses 11 1.8.3 Household Surveys 12 1.8.4 Fishers’ Group Questionnaire/Discussion 14 1.8.5 Participatory Observation with Fishers 14 1.8.6 Observation and Snorkeling 15 1.8.7 Fishers’ Creel Surveys 15 1.8.8 Recording/Observation of Coastal and Marine Activities 16 1.8.9 Interviews with Government Officials 16 1.8.10 Data Analyses 17

1.9 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE FIELDWORK METHODS 17 1.10 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS 20

CHAPTER T O HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHOREBIODIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC REGION

2.1 INTRODUCTION 21 2.2 COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF 21

PACIFIC ISLANDS 2.3 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES 22 2.4 CORALS AND REEFS 23 2.5 COASTAL VEGETATION 24 2.6 IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES AND OTHER MARINE SPECIES 25

2.6.1 Finfishes 27 2.6.2 Shellfish and other Marine Species 28

2.7 IMPACTS AFFECTING COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 29 2.7.1 Tropical Cyclones 30

vi

2.7.2 Global Warming and Coral Bleaching 31 2.7.3 Coastal Deforestation and De-vegetation 32 2.7.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution 33 2.7.5 Mining 36 2.7.6 Infra-structural Impacts 39 2.7.7 Sedimentation and other Streams link Problems with Coasts 40

2.8 IMPACTS ON NEARSHORE MARINE AND FISHERIES 41 2.8.1 Over-harvesting and Exploited Species 42 2.8.2 Fishing Methods 45

2.9 VULNERALIBITY AND THREATS TO CORALS AND REEFS 47 2.10 MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 48 2.11 PACIFIC REGIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT 49

CHAPTER THREE SAMOA: BAC GROUND COASTAL ANDNEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY AND ASSOCIATEDPROBLEMS

3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER 50 3.2 LOCATION AND POLITICAL HISTORY OF INDEPENDENT SAMOA 50 3.3 GEOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY 51 3.4 CLIMATE 52 3.5 FLORA 52 3.6 3.5.1 Littoral Vegetation 53 3.7 FAUNA 54 3.8 MARINE ENVIRONMENT 56

3.7.1 Fisheries 57 3.7.2 Finfishes 58 3.7.3 Commercial Contribution and Important Marine Species 59 3.7.4 Corals and Reefs 60

3.8 LAND AND MARINE TENURE 61 3.9 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES 63 3.10 DEMOGRAPHY 65 3.11 ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT 65 3.12 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY 67

3.12.1 Natural Events 67 3.12.2 Coastal Deforestation and Reclamation 68 3.12.3 Sedimentation and other Stream Link Problems to 69

Nearshore Ecosystems 3.12.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution 70 3.12.5 Dredging and Sand Mining 71 3.12.6 Infra-structural Development and Impacts 71

3.13 OVER-HARVESTING AND EXPLOITATION OF MARINE SPECIES 73 3.13.1 Fishing Methods 75 3.13.2 Threats to Corals and Reefs 76 3.14 MANAGEMENT AND LEGISLATIONS 77

vii

CHAPTER FOUR STUDY VILLAGES AND COASTAL BIODIVERSITY

4.1 INTRODUCTION 78 4.2 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT 78 4.3 SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND GENDER ROLES 81 4.4 SOURCES OF INCOME IN RESEARCH VILLAGES 82 4.5 COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS OF STUDY 84

VILLAGES4.6 RESULTS: COASTAL VEGETATION AND USEFUL PLANTS 88 4.7 INFRA-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENTS AND IMPACTS 98 4.8 OTHER COASTAL IMPACTS: AGRICULTURE, LITTER AND SAND MINING 101

CHAPTER FIVE NEARSHORE MARINE BIODIVERSITY OF THESTUDY VILLAGES

5.1 INTRODUCTION 102 5.2 FISHERIES FOR SURVIVAL AND FISHING ACTIVITIES 102 5.3 CORALS AND REEFS 104 5.4 LARGE NEARSHORE FINFISHES 107

5.4.1 Abundance of Large Nearshore Finfishes 110 5.5 SMALL NEARSHORE FINFISHES 112

5.5.1 Fishers Creel Survey and Abundance of Small Finfishes 115 5.6 RAYS, SHARKS, MORAY EELS AND ABUNDANCE 120 5.7 MOLLUSCS 122

5.7.1 Large and Small Shellfishes 123 5.7.2 Creel Survey and Abundance of Molluscs 125

5.8 SEA CUCUMBERS, SEA URCHINS AND SEA STARS 129 5.8.1. Abundance of Sea cucumbers, Urchins and Stars 132

5.9 JELLYFISH, SEA ANEMONE, SEAWEEDS, SEA WORMS AND 133 ABUNDANCE 5.10 CRUSTACEANS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE 137 5.11 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE SPECIES 139 5.11.1 Sedimentation and Unclean Lagoon 140

5.11.2 Fishing Activities and Methods Used 140 5.11.3 Impacts of Natural Disasters 144 5.11.4 Agricultural and Waste Disposal Effects 146

5.12 MANAGEMENT IN THE STUDY VILLAGES 146

CHAPTER SI CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 INTRODUCTION 148 6.2 DISCUSSION AND CHANGES AFFECTING THE STUDY VILLAGES 148 6.3 MANAGEMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS 152 6.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 153

BIBLIOGRAPHYAPPENDICES

viii

LIST OF TABLES PAGES

Table 1.1 Table showing household numbers at the time of survey and 12 the sample sizes of households interviewed in householdsurveys in the study villages

Table 2.1 Important coastal marine species resources at surveyed Islands 26

Table 2.2 Waste disposal figures for selected Pacific Island countries 34

Table 2.3 Exploitation of coastal materials in Pacific Island countries 37

Table 2.4 Plants used as poisons in the Pacific region 46

Table 3.1 Coral cover for Upolu and Savai’i Islands 61

Table 3.2 Total population of Samoa from 1976 – 2001 65

Table 3.3 Marine organisms now absent from Fagaloa Bay 73

Table 3.4 Summary of the six-monthly review of villages carried out in 77 December 2000

Table 4.1 Population of the Study Villages as of 2001 78

Table 4.2 List of plant species identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of 89 men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 4.3 List of plant species with medicinal uses identified in a sample 93 survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of UpoluIsland, Samoa during July to August 2004

ix

Table 4.4 List of plant uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of 95 men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 4.5 Perception that specified coastal plant species known and listed 97 have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004.

Table 5.1 Number of creel surveys/catches inventories during fieldwork in 104 four study villages in Samoa from July to August 2004

Table 5.2 Frequency that specified species of corals found and listed 105 in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.3 Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species 108 were listed as being among the 20 most significant, in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.4 Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species 111 were listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.5 Frequency with which specified small finfishes were listed as being 112 among the 20 most significant, nearshore species in a samplesurvey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.6 Frequency of finfish catches from fishers creel surveys at the study 115 villages during July to August 2004

x

Table 5.7 Fequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were 118 listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.8 Frequency with which specified species of sharks, rays and moray 121 eels are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of menand women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.9 Frequency of sharks and moray eels from the fishers’ creel surveys 122 at the four study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.10 Frequency with which specified molluscs species were known and 123 listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in fourvillages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.11 Frequency with which specified species of mollucss were known and 125 listed as declined, rare and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groupsof men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa duringJuly to August 2004

Table 5.12 Frequency of molluscs from the fishers’ creel surveys at the four 127 study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.13 Frequency with which specified species of sea-cucumbers, sea- 129 urchins and sea-stars were known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

xi

Table 5.14 Frequency of sea cucumbers and sea urchins from fishers creel 131 surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004

Table 5.15 Frequency with which specified species of sea cucumbers, sea 132 urchins and sea stars were known and listed as declined, becomerare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men andwomen in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July toAugust 2004

Table 5.16 Frequency with which specified species of jellyfish, sea-anemone, 134 seaweeds and sea worms were known and listed in a sample surveyon 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island,Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.17 Frequency with which specified species of sea-anemone, seaweeds, 135 and sea worms are known and listed has declined, become rare anddepleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in fourvillages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.18 Frequency with which specified crustacean species are known and 137 listed by fishers in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and womenin four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004

Table 5.19 Frequency of crabs and lobsters from fishers creel surveys at 139 the four study villages during July to August 2004

xii

LIST OF FIGURES PAGES

Figure 1.1 The distribution of true freshwater fishes, Nautilus, 3 fruit bats, and the giant clam Tridacna in the Pacific.

Figure 3.1 Map of the South Pacific Islands showing the location 51 of Samoa, the research country

Figure 3.2 Fishing areas 58

Figure 3.3 Fish uses 58

Figure 3.4 Map showing the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Pacific and Samoa 62

Figure 3.5 Volcanic formations and types of coastlines of Upolu Island 64

Figure 4.1 Map of Upolu Island showing the four study villages 79

Figure 4.2 The steep mountainous area of Fagaloa 80

Figure 4.3 Samoan social structure 81

Figure 4.4a Selling sea cucumbers and urchins at the roadside 83

Figure 4.4b Fisher gathering sea urchin (Vailele) 83

Figure 4.5 Households’ use of catch 83

Figure 4.6 Aerial photograph of Fagaloa showing river patterns and coastline 85

xiii

Figure 4.7 Aerial photograph of Lefaga showing the scattered the 86 settlement of Gagaifolevao

Figure 4.8 The west area lagoon of Gagaifo showing corals, fringing reef 87 and Masavai pocket beach

Figure 4.9 Aerial photograph of Vailele showing dense population, lagoon 88 and reef area

Figure. 4.10 Mangrove community on the east end of Ta’elefaga Village 91

Figure 4.11 Swamp at Gagaifo Village 91

Figure 4.12a Spring water pool at Vailele providing fresh water for cooking, 92 washing and bathing

Figure 4.12b Brackish water on the coast of Gagaifo use for bathing and washing 92

Figure 4.13a Planting coconut for coastal protection at the east end of Gagaifo 96

Figure 4.13b Tropical almond and coconut trees along the shore of Ma’asina 96

Figure 4.14a Rock seawall for coastal protection from wave erosion at 98 Ta’elefaga River mouth

Figure 4.14b A coral rubble seawall built by a family at Vailele 98

Figure 4.15a Discolored lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village due to wastewater from 99 the hydro-electric power station

Figure 4.15b Murky lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village 99

xiv

Figures 4.16 a–d Coastal erosion along the shores of the study villages 100

Figure 4.17a Children at Vailele mining sand for beautification of house 101 surroundings

Figure 4.17b Sand mining at Gagaifo for construction purposes 101

Figure 5.1a Consumption per week in households at the four study villages 102

Figure 5.1b Uses of fishers’ catches in the four villages 103

Figures 5.2a Cooked crab, moray eels & bottle of sea cucumber/gonads 103

Figure 5.2b Cooked large finfish and lobster for visitor’s meal 103

Figure 5.3a Soft corals at Gagaifo 105

Figure 5.3b Healthy plate corals at Gagaifo 106

Figure 5.3c Regenerating corals at Gagaifo 106

Figure 5.4a Degraded corals at Ta’elefaga 107

Figure 5.4b Dead tops of Porites at Ta’elefaga 107

Figures 5.5a–e Some important large finfishes caught at the study villages during 109 the time of the fieldwork

Figure 5.6a-g Some important small finfishes, eels and sharks caught at the 119 study villages

xv

Figure 5.7a-f Some important shellfishes at the study villages 124

Figures 5.8a-f Some important sea cucumbers and other marine species 130 at the study villages

Figure 5.9a-l Other important marine species at the study villages 136

Figure 5.10a-h Crustaceans seen at the study villages 138

Figure 5. 11 Methods of fishing used at the study villages 142

Figure 5.12a-c Some fishing methods and activities at the study villages 142

Figure 5.13 Hours and tides of fishing 143

Figures 5.14a-c Diving/spearing night fishers' catches 144

Figures 5.15a-b Rubble banks deposited on the reefs by cyclones Ofa (1990) 144 and Val (1991)

Figure 5.16 Coast of Gagaifo Village flattened by cyclone Ofa leaving fewer 145 coastal plants

Figure 5.17: Coastal road at Fagaloa next to the sea as seen at Salimu Village 145 (west of Ta'elefaga)

xvi

xvii

L A

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FFA Forum Fisheries Agency IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources MPA Marine Protected Areas SIDS Small Island Developing States SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community SPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCAP United Nation Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The environment and natural resources worldwide are deteriorating at an alarming rate as escalating population growth generates increasing economic and other human activities. This has developed the environmentalists’ awareness because a lot of changes have been experienced globally, such as more frequent occurrence of extreme natural events. These natural hazards have severe impacts on the vulnerable environment of small Islands of the Pacific with their limited resources, especially when those resources have been degraded or over-exploited (SPREP, 1994b).

The coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity are the most fundamental and significant resources that Pacific Islands depend on for their necessities (FAO, 2002). These ecosystems have the most useful terrestrial and marine resources, are the most heavily settled, and are the most susceptible to changes by natural and human activities as many results of these human induced actions end up affecting the coastal zone and the sea.

The coastal zone is “the interface between the land and sea and includes the relevant components of the adjacent terrestrial and marine areas” (McLean 1991 in SPREP, 1994b). McLean (1991) explained that coastal zones were determined by the outcome of interactions and linkages in the past and present between the land and sea. Furthermore, climatic changes and physical processes play a major role in present coastal zones and these changes are quite obvious on islands with their fragile island environments (SPREP, 1994b).

Coastal and nearshore areas encompass a large number of ecosystems, which have a great diversity of non-living and living resources. These include the sub-tidal zone, which is normally submerged at low tide, the inter-tidal zone, which is normally emerged at low tide and submerged at high tide and the nearshore coastal zone or supra-tidal area.

1

The diversity of inter-tidal and supra-tidal ecosystems consists of exposed coral reefs and reef flats, mangrove swamps, marsh wetlands, coastal littoral forest and rocky and sandy beaches that are home to numerous coastal plants and nearshore marine organisms and other species like sea birds. Mangroves and reef communities are significant on Islands because these provide protection for coasts and also for the regeneration of many marine organisms.

Diversity of nearshore subtidal marine ecosystems include lagoons, fringing and barrier reefs, corals with a high diversity of marine species including large and small finfish, shellfish, sea grasses, seaweeds and several other marine organisms.

Corals, reefs and marine life play a major role in the Pacific for island formation and protection such as providing habitats and food for many nearshore marine species. Coral reefs constitute the primary coastal protection structures on most tropical small Islands as well as providing sand for the formation of atoll islets and beaches (SPREP, 1996).

Samoa like many small Pacific Islands has relatively high biodiversity but limited area and marine productivity and thus limited in terms of natural resources. The biodiversity of Pacific Islands have high levels of species endemism due to their location further away from the Indo-southwest Pacific, the source area of organisms’ dispersal. There is less variety of biodiversity of coastal plants and marine species on the Polynesian Islands compared to the bigger and older Melanesian islands of Papua New Guinea, New Caledonia, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji (Kay, 1999).

The distribution of marine resources is similar to that of terrestrial resources in richness with the highest diversity of species being in the west and decreasing towards the eastern Pacific (Figure. 1.1) (Kay, 1999).

2

Figure 1.1: The distribution of true freshwater fishes, Nautilus, fruit bats, and the giant clam Tridacna in the Pacific. Dropouts like these animals contribute to species attenuation west to east in the Pacific.

Source: Kay (1999)

… to move inwards from the Cook Islands to Tonga is to move from bare and barren reef flats to communities of sea grasses and mangroves, abundant ophiuroids (sea stars)and probably twice as many genera of reef building corals: ( Stoddart, 1976 in Kay, 1999)

Figure 1.1 shows the attenuation of some species indicating the decrease of species diversity towards the eastern Pacific from the centre of diversity from the source area in the western Pacific. The dropoff in diversity of terrestrial species is greater compared to marine because marine species are more mobile due to ocean currents that aid the dispersal of marine organisms. This is an important contributing factor to high endemism of land biota and to the low endemism of marine biota (Kay, 1999).

The limit size and biological productivity trends are of significance to Pacific Island nations because of their dependence on limited resources available to them that the coastal and nearshore areas provide.

3

The biodiversity of plants, animals and marine resources in the Pacific are critical to the livelihoods of local communities. As Thaman (1994) stresses:

Biodiversity is not income that should be spent or destroyed. It is the ‘capital’ needed for development and maintenance of Pacific societies which ‘subsistence affluence’ and almost all ‘income’ (both cash and non-cash) is derived. It is the foundation of their

culture.

Inshore lagoons and reefs are the most important fishing grounds not only in Samoa but also in the Pacific region for consumption and currently for commercial or artisanal fisheries. Adams etal. (1996) reported that subsistence fishery accounted for 80% of the annual inshore fishery production in the Pacific Island countries.

Low-lying Islands and atoll countries such as Kiribati, Tuvalu, Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia are the most dependent on fisheries resources for subsistence consumption compared to high Islands that have other sources of food (Gillet and Lightfoot, 2002). This indicates the significance of coastal and nearshore areas in subsistence fishing and earning income for Island people and countries. FAO (2002) reported that subsistence fisheries of Pacific Islands capture about 102,000 mt per year (about 70%) of the total harvest from coastal areas.

Worldwide the coastal areas are the main areas of settlement and developments. The Earth Summit report 1992 stated that more than 50% of the world’s population lives within 60km of the shoreline and this could increase to three quarters by the year 2020 (Quarrie, 1992). Not only does the majority of the human population live in coastal areas, but more than half of the people live in less developed countries (Barnabé and Barnabé, 1997).

Traditionally people in the Pacific Islands settled along the coasts where there is easy access to marine resources and services that provide for their livelihood. Urbanization has intensified the focus on coastal resources because high populations are now more densely concentrated along these flat coastal areas. This is the case in main Pacific Island urban areas such as Suva, Fiji; Honiara, Solomon Islands; Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea; Port Vila, Vanuatu; Oahu, Hawaii; and Apia, Samoa on high Islands; and South Tarawa and Funafuti on the small atolls of Kiribati and Tuvalu. In Marshall Islands the urban growth is 8.2%; for Ebeye and its population density it

4

is now over 23,200 per km². Similarly, the urban growth rates for Pago Pago, American Samoa and Port Vila, Vanuatu are 7.3% whilst Honiara, Solomons is 6.2% per year (UNESCAP, 2000).

The rapid improvement of infra-structure, services and communication as indicators of economic growth is leading to the rapid change in people’s way of life in villages. In the Pacific, subsistence fishing is the most important in rural areas however as rural economies become increasingly monetized, theres gradual move away from fishing for home consumption only but towards fishing as a means of generating cash income (FAO, 2002).

There are many potential uses and developments that exist and compete for space in the coastal zone in the Pacific. These include settlement, manufacturing industries, infrastructure, tourism and recreation, agriculture as well as commercial and subsistence fishing. As more development focuses along the coasts, coastal ecosystems and biodiversity are increasingly exposed to threats leading to problems such as coastal erosion, coral and reef degradation, marine pollution and loss of coastal and marine biodiversity.

Coastal and nearshore ecosystems of Pacific Islands are fragile and susceptible to both human activities and natural disasters such as tropical cyclones. Natural disasters are frequently affecting Pacific Island coastal areas; for example Cyclone Heta in January 2004 devastated property and the environment of Niue before it hit Tokelau and to a lesser extent the Samoa Islands. Tropical cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991 devastated the coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of Samoa. Zann (1991) noted the severe destruction caused by cyclone Ofa on reefs such as the long wide emergent cyclone banks formed along almost all of the reef crests and tops along the west and east areas from Apia.

The situation of coastal and nearshore reef and marine resources in Samoa is deteriorating due to great pressure from human activities and exacerbated by cyclones. Over ten years ago, studies by Zann (1991a; 1991b) raised concerns on damage to lagoon and reef areas and Taulealo (1993) stated that lagoons and reefs of Western Samoa are amongst the most degraded in the Pacific. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries estimated that 90% of the coral reef around Apia is dead (Taulealo, 1993).

5

The nature of island origins, their small sizes, isolation and unique fragile environments and ecosystems expose them to many environmental dangers. Therefore there is a need for PacificIsland countries to take action in conservation measures to protect coastal ecosystems, biodiversity and other unique resources and species within coastal low-lying habitats. Modern and traditional management plans need to be incorporated in order to preserve coastal and nearshore marine resources that Pacific Islands depend heavily on.

In this research, coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity refers to the coast, lagoon and reef ecosystems. Associated problems that exist at these zones within the four study sites on the Island of Upolu is also discussed.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Loss of coastal and marine biodiversity is disastrous for island nations that have fragile ecosystems. Human actions and extreme natural hazards like tropical cyclones, coral bleaching and sea-level rise are degrading coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity of Pacific Islands and Samoa alike.

Coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems face pollution from household disposal; manufacturing effluents; coastal erosion not only from cyclones but also structures like seawalls; coastal deforestation; agriculture; sand mining; reclamation and settlement as well as efficient and destructive fishing techniques. These problems threaten the existence and availability of marine and coastal organisms. Taylor (1991) stated that sediment and nutrient pollution of lagoons is damaging the reef system in Western Samoa and this contributed to the collapse of the inshore fishery (Taulealo, 1993).

Many fish and marine organisms are endangered as they become scarce now or even depleted due to habitat loss and exploitation for commercial and subsistence uses. The significance of small-scale or artisanal fishery and subsistence fishing is usually overlooked but these activities are the main causes of over-harvesting, over-fishing and coral destruction.

6

1.3 HYPOTHESIS

Human activities have exploited coastal and nearshore ecosystems at an accelerating rate and these effects have been exacerbated by the impacts of tropical cyclones.

1.4 OBJECTIVES

The overall objective is to discuss the importance of coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity and investigate the natural and human impacts that affect the nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of selected sites on the northeast and south coast of Upolu, the main island of Samoa. The specific objectives are to:

Identify the main coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems at selected sites as well as discussing their importance to the environment and people

Assess and discuss the effects of developments and people’s activities as well as natural hazards on the coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity

Describe the factors and reasons that drive people to put pressure on their coastal and nearshore marine resources

State the policies and management plans that the government, agencies and local communities have in relation to people’s actions and the uses of these coastal ecosystems and marine resources

Recommend measures to minimize and monitor the problems of coastal pollution and nearshore marine pressure and exploitation.

1.5 USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY

Interest in this particular topic was aroused by the fact that although coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems provide the most significant resources to our small Pacific Islands and communities, they are not well managed and are being degraded at a frightening rate. Whilst these areas are the focus of development activities in Samoa and other Pacific Islands they are also the most vulnerable to global environment changes. Developing local people’s sense of responsibility needs to be addressed in order to protect the vulnerable coastal and nearshore biodiversity in both the Pacific Islands and Samoa.

7

This study examines the significance of coastal and nearshore ecosystems and discusses the implications of human activities and natural hazards, particularly tropical cyclones on these areas. The biodiversity of these areas is vital in the Pacific and the local communities need to manage and minimize pressure on limited resources available instead of prioritizing economic but exploitative effects.

The growing populations of the Pacific Islands and Samoa rely heavily on coastal and nearshore areas for a significant proportion of their daily needs. As a result these low-lying areas are susceptible to many pressing environmental problems such as coastal erosion, water and marine pollution, habitat loss for many organisms such as those in mangrove areas, destruction of coral reefs due to pollution and sedimentation and over-exploitation and loss of biodiversity. The economic needs of our local communities to survive must be compatible with sustaining our environment by using appropriate measures.

Governments, communities and individuals understand that we depend on coastal and nearshore marine resources but needs to increase awareness to recognize the significance of our biodiversity and how living organisms in these ecosystems interact. Nonetheless, the surge of economic growth and benefits should not neglect our future need for this same coastal biodiversity inheritance. The governments and communities must implement legislation and policies that are already in place but have not been acted upon as well as adopting new strategies that can promote the sustainable use of coastal ecosystems and biodiversity.

By developing increased public awareness of these pressing issues we can hopefully provide sustainable means to maintain our environment’s equilibrium so that future generations will survive in a healthy environment.

The government, local communities and individuals need to take the initiative to develop and be responsible for the sustainable use of their own environment to support them and future generations. Awareness of the problems will also hopefully lead to the implementation of measures that the government and village communities can use for better decision-making and to conserve their resources in a sustainable way.

8

1.6 SELECTION OF RESEARCH TECHNIQUES

A variety of qualitative and quantitative methods were used to gather and analyse the information to achieve the objectives and goals of this study. Literature and archival research highlighted the importance and status of coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems in the Pacific Islands and Samoa. Reconnaissance visits to prospective study villages of Gagaifolevao and Vailele evaluated their relevance for use in the research. Literature provided some information on the impacts of the hydro electricity Dam on the coast and lagoon of Fagaloa Bay, thus the reason for the using of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina villages from this area.

Household surveys, fishers’ creel surveys and detailed group questionnaires identified the nearshore resources that are considered to be common and endangered. These also explained the factors that pressure people to exploit these ecosystems and organisms.

Interviews with key government officials were carried out to identify the current conservation efforts used to manage coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity at both the national and local community level. Other techniques used included participant observation, snorkelling and recording of coastal activities seen at the coastal areas of the study villages.

1.7 SELECTION OF STUDY VILLAGES

The following factors were taken into consideration in the selection of the four villages studied in this research.

The northeast coast of Upolu Island is less studied compared to the flat and densely populated northwest coast. The three villages selected from the coast northeast of Apia were Vailele; Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, both rural villages on Fagaloa Bay. The fourth village was Gagaifolevao on the south coast of Upolu.

Vailele near Apia Town is a densely populated and a rapidly urbanizing village. It is also a fishing village in which women fishers play a vital role in fishing activities.

9

Infra-structural development like boulders seawalls and roads affected the coastal areas of the study villages. The establishment of the hydroelectricity power station greatly affects the coast of both Ta’elefaga and neighbouring Ma’asina, and has contributed to the loss and decline of some marine organisms from Fagaloa Bay.

Gagaifolevao, commonly known as Gagaifo, on the south coast of Upolu, has experienced marine commercial activities such as the exploitation of coral and fish for the marine aquarium trade and also had participated in the Fishing Extension Programme (now known as the Samoa Fisheries Project by the Fisheries Department).

These reasons plus other impacts of human activities and natural disasters, such as the damaged caused by recent tropical cyclones were basis for the selection of these villages as study sites. The fieldwork at Gagaifo and Vailele were carried out in July and Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in August 2004. After fieldwork at each of the four study villages, a week was allocated for archival research to gather information from the Fisheries Division and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and the Nelson Memorial Library in Apia as well as contacting village mayors to arrange accommodation and the fieldwork schedules in their villages.

1.8 METHODOLOGY AND RECONNAISSANCE VISITS

Reconnaissance visits to Vailele and Gagaifo villages were carried out to view the coastal zones of these areas. This was useful in getting the general views of the villagers about the situation of their nearshore marine resources and also the existence of coastal problems. Previous studies and environmental impact assessments of the hydroelectricity dam provided some information about its impact on Fagaloa area.

The Internal Affairs Office provided assistance and collaborated with village mayors (pulenu’u) in the study villages and requested official permission for the fieldwork to be carried out in their villages. With this help no formal meetings with village councils were necessary except a meeting of the researcher with the village mayors to explain and clarify the purpose of the

10

research and how it would be carried out in their villages. The village mayors liaised with their village councils for permission in allowing the research to take place and for access to selected cultural groups for discussions.

The fieldwork was carried out in the four villages from the first week of July to the last week of August 2004. The study first started at Gagaifo village for two and a half weeks as the weather was not favourable for fishers and many other nearshore activities. One and a half weeks were spent at Vailele Village and one week each at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

1.8.1 Literature and Archival Research

The literature review and archival research provided information on coastal and nearshore biodiversity of the Pacific region in general and Samoa in particular. The information collected was from various resource centres such as the Pacific Islands Marine Resource Information Service (PIMRIS) and the USP Library at Laucala Campus, Suva; The Nelson Memorial Library, the Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment and the Fisheries Department in Apia, Samoa; and the Internet or (WWW).

1.8.2 Field Survey Methods and Analyses

Data collection used in the four selected villages employed the following techniques: -

Household surveys

Fishers group questionnaire/discussions

Participatory observation with fishers

Observation and snorkelling

Fishers’ creel surveys

Recorded observations of coastal and marine activities in every two hours

Interviews with government officials from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and the Fisheries Division

SPSS and Excel computer programmes were used to analyze the group questionnaires, household and fishers’ creel surveys

11

The forms used for household and fishers’ creel surveys and also in recording coastal and marine activities are attached with guidelines of tasks instructions in Appendices 1a–1e. The group questionnaire was constructed with the help of the thesis supervisor, Professor Randy Thaman, and the creel and household surveys were revised from the forms used and provided by Professor Leon Zann from his previous work in Samoa.

1.8.3 Household Surveys

The household surveys sample sizes depended on the number of households per village and were selected randomly. In small villages such as Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, every third household was interviewed whilst every fifth household were interviewed in the large villages of Gagaifo and Vailele (see Appendix Ib for the form used).

The total sampled number for the small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga, which had 30 or less household, was 5 and 8 households, respectively. In the large villages of Gagaifo and Vailele, 15 and 20 households were interviewed (Table 1.1). The majority of the people interviewed at these households were the household cooks, wives of fishers and female fishers, although sometimes both the male fisher and his wife were respondents.

Table 1.1: Table showing the number of households and the sample sizes of households interviewed in the household surveys in the study villages

VILLAGES Vailele Ma’asina Ta’elefaga Gagaifo

Total no. of Households 87* 18 24 68

No. of Sampled households 20 5 8 15

* Not the total number of households in the whole village but household numbers along the coast only in the vicinity of the village

The numbers of households (Table 1.1) counted at the time of the research in Ma’asina, Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo provided the sampling frame for the sampled household interviews, rather than the household number recorded by the Samoa 2001 census.

The numbers of households shown and used were the total number as counted in the three villages. For Vailele Village the number used was based on the estimated 80–90 households

12

located near the coast within the immediate vicinity of the main village. These households are under the traditional village council and also participate in traditional and customary activities in the village.

Household surveys at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga were easy to conduct as they are small concentrated villages with few households that spread along the coastal road. Households at Gagaifo were more dispersed from the coast towards inland and they were all included.

The interviewed households in these four villages consisted of extended families and large and small immediate families known as iga. The iga consist of a chief and his/her immediate family or extended families including relatives that live in the household. Large immediate families were composed of the chief and spouse, their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.

For the purpose of this research a household referred to either extended or immediate families that eat together. Large extended and immediate families that live next to each other but prepare and eat separately were counted as different households. This was because the household survey was concerned with what the households consume daily, whether they had fish and seafood or other food types.

More than half of Vailele’s dense population lives on freehold lands further inland that had been sold to incoming people. Most of these new migrants are not under the cultural system of the village council (fono) and were not included in the household survey.

The households near the coast of Vailele who among are the main users of the village fishing area and coastal resources were included in the household surveys. Even though the inland households were excluded from the household surveys these people were included in the fishers’ creel surveys although during the study there were no fishers from these inland households. There were, however, a few male fishers from other neighbouring villages encountered during the creel surveys.

13

1.8.4 Fishers’ Group Questionnaire/Discussion

This technique was modified from its original proposed method of using everyone in the cultural or social groups that exist in villages such as the groups of chiefs, chiefs’ wives, untitled young men and the young women. This method was altered due to budget or financial constraints of the research as it was dealing with more than one village.

Consequently, the social groups’ questionnaires/discussion targeted only men and women fishers and the number of groups varied in villages due to the number of fishers. The small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga had a small number of households that range from 16 to 25 and there were fewer fishers too. In these villages fishers’ were grouped into one male and one female group for discussion and these groups each consisted of 6 fishers.

In Vailele and Gagaifo that contained more fishers, there was one group for women; a group for older male fishers or chiefs and another group for the young untitled male fishers. The three groups in each village consisted of 6 members and were also interviewed. Because there were not many women fishers in the four villages they were all put into one group; these groups contained 6 women fishers each and 7 in the group at Vailele.

The questionnaires used in these group discussions were long and detailed and each questionnaire usually lasted for two or two and half hours’ maximum (see Appendix Ie). For this reason the time allocated for these questionnaires was usually in the evenings and the male group at Ta’elefaga took place on a Sunday evening.

1.8.5 Participatory Observation with Fishers

Participatory observation included going out with male and female fishers that fish on the shore, reefs and the lagoon. Women fishers were easy to accompany as they fish mainly in daytimewithin the lagoon or on the reef especially at Vailele Village where a lot of women fishers went out fishing for sea cucumbers, sea hares and sea urchins at low tide.

14

Male fishers were also accompanied especially those using cast nets, hook and lines as well as eel traps as they usually fish along the shore, lagoon and on the reefs. On some occasions fishers on canoes were accompanied when they went out fishing in the lagoon and reefs using gillnets. Male fishers diving with spears were awaited on shore when they returned ashore and many of them fished at nighttime especially on Friday and Saturday nights.

Participating with and accompanying fishers was vital to observe problems concerning the status of fishing grounds and corals, the species that were normally found, the techniques used as well as becoming familiar with the local names of species.

1.8.6 Observation and Snorkelling

Observation on land and snorkelling underwater allowed for the firsthand identification of coastal plants, nearshore marine species and associated problems as well as confirming the concerns raised and discussed in the interviews and questionnaires.

Snorkelling was significant, interesting and informative to observe the situation of the inshore lagoons of the four villages. At the villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga snorkelling in the inshore lagoon was carried out from shore across the reef and from the reef to the shore.

At Vailele, snorkelling was carried out at high tide because the lagoon is too shallow during low tide, during which time observation was carried out by walking from shore to the reef. The reefs of all villages were visited at low tides, sometimes with fishers. Snorkelling was carried out in different sites of Gagaifo also from the shore to the reef to observe most parts of the inshore in order to view the health of corals and associated problems.

1.8.7 Fishers’ Creel Surveys

The creel survey recorded the fishers’ daily catches when they returned from fishing to identify the quantity and sizes of the various species caught. The catches/species were recorded in the Samoan vernacular as identified by the fishers (see Appendix Ic for the form used). Sea cucumbers gonads as well as other seafood for which the quantity was difficult to calculate

15

accurately were recorded as numbers of bottles. This was after the women fishers cleaned, cut and bottled them in plastic bottles before selling on the roadside or use for family consumption.

The creel surveys attempted to determine the abundance of marine species that are common, declining or the types that have become rare. It also allowed for the observation of various fishing techniques used by fishers and the particular fishes these methods targeted. It also provided information on species that are commercially valuable and those used only for subsistence consumption.

1.8.8 Recording/Observation of Coastal and Marine Activities

Observing and recording of coastal and nearshore marine activities were carried out daily during the time of the fieldwork in each of the villages except Sundays and this usually started at 6:00am until 6:00pm.

This task recorded all kinds of human activities that occurred along the coast and shoreline in every two hours of the day as well as the fishing activities and fishing methods being used. This method identified other uses of coastal and nearshore resources apart from fishing (see Appendix Id for the form used).

1.8.9 Interviews with Government Officials

Key resource people interviewed were from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmentand the Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.

These interviews were carried out in February 2005 with the Principal Fisheries Officer, Magele Eteuati Ropeti, the coordinator of the Samoa Fisheries Project that deals with village community marine reserves and Lui Bell from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, who provided information concerning the marine reserve projects under this Ministry such as the marine protected areas (MPA) at Aleipata and Safata Villages.

16

1.8.10 Data Analyses

The SPSS programme was used to enter and analyze data of households and fishers’ creel surveys. Totals gained from SPSS analysis were entered into the Excel programme and produced the graphs used.

1.9 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE FIELDWORK METHODS

The techniques and methods used in any survey have their advantages and weaknesses so in this research various methods were used to strengthen the limitation of one particular technique as well as to achieve the objectives of the research.

The benefit of using household surveys (Appendix Ib) in each village was to get information of the villagers’ food type consumption. The disadvantage of this survey was the inconsistency of information from the household interviewees especially in listing the kinds of food they ate the previous day or the food they ate in that week. In order to avoid some unreliable information the cooks (usually the fishers’ wives) were sought out to give accounts of the food consumed the previous day or for that week.

Creel surveys (Appendix Ic) conducted on the shores recorded the fishers’ catches and this was relevant to witness the type of finfish, shellfish and other seafood that are common and rare. This method idenitified the species that people preferred for consumption and for sale.

Observation of fishing methods and activities assisted in finding out the types that were used or which are more efficient, as well as identifying species caught with particular fishing techniques. The problem encountered with this method was the irregular times of fishing that depended on the tides, for example during night low tides fishers come back late at night. It was easier to record catches of night fishers that lived near the place the researcher stayed; those living at far distances were recorded early the next morning. But there were cases where some night fishers left early the following morning on the first bus to take their catches to the market, or even sold them before the researcher had the opportunity to record their night catches.

17

This was the problem encountered with leaving night fishers’ catches until morning so the researcher usually awaited and recorded the night fishers’ catches on shore until 12:00am and only those that came later were recorded the following morning. Sometimes, especially on Saturday nights, many fishers went out fishing and their catches were recorded very early on Sunday morning before they had prepared their earthen oven (umu).

Since the researcher worked alone it was difficult to record all fishers catches, especially night fishers or when many women fishers came back together at different locations, mainly when the tide started to come in. To avoid this with some cases at Vailele, children helped by asking fishers at other locations to wait for the researcher recording catches at another site.

Some fishers also tried to avoid the recording of their catches. They were suspicious and hesitant especially when their catches included undersized species however they were informed that the research is not a survey to record illegal activities or government regulations but for studies purposes. Groups’ discussions (Appendix Ie) sometimes were difficult to facilitate, as there were people that sometimes dominated group discussions. To minimize this, the questions were sometimes asked directly to a person and then elaborated by the others. Also older chiefs/fishers were separated from the untitled young men’s group to avoid this problem.

Participatory observation and snorkelling were good ways in actively taking part with fishers’ tasks and at the same time asking them informal questions about village problems concerning their coastal and nearshore environment. Snorkelling was carried out to witness the situation of corals and reefs as well as identifying the species found at various sites.

Another way of gaining accurate information was taking the village children, who usually fish on the shore and were interested and honest with their responses. The children were keen and helpful assistants that accompanied the researcher on observation and in identifying some of the marine species on the beaches. They also showed places to find some of the organisms that were stated by the older people and even recorded by written reports as being locally depleted from Fagaloa nearshore marine.

18

The other main problem was the lack of knowledge among the younger age groups of the vernacular names of some coastal plants and marine species. There were also other constraints encountered. For example, two weeks were allocated for the two villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa but because the village mayor of Ma’asina was away in some days during the fieldwork, accommodation was not available in this village. Ta’elefaga then was the main place of accommodation within these two weeks and recording night creel survey was difficult at night particularly due to walking back and forth from Ta’elefaga. Recording night fishers’ catches at Ma’asina was then carried out early the following morning but it was usually difficult to find out who had gone out fishing the night before.

The schedule with group discussions at Vailele has been postponed often because the village social groups of untitled men (aumaga) and young women (aualuma) were practicing their cricket teams that participated in the Teuila Festival. The village mayor had a heavy schedule at the time and accommodation at his place was not possible due to the time of the research. The researcher then stayed and commute from Tulaele, another village within Apia Town and conducted the fieldwork including the night creel surveys.

Although the village mayors liaised first with the village councils for their approval and to explain the purpose of the study as well as notifying the fishers about the group questionnaires surveys, some fishers did not come at the allocated time so the questionnaires were postponed a few times at all villages. This was to suit the fishers’ convenience and also to have more time for the detailed questionnaires that usually took two hours to complete. The fishers were then compensated with $10 per person as an appreciation of their time given for this task.

At Gagaifo Village a new village mayor (pulenu’u) started the week the research commenced and a problem which broke out within the village chief council of chiefs (fono) resulted to the split-up of the council into two sides. The researcher then had to contact individual fishers and explain to them the nature of the study and to find a time suitable for the discussions. The meeting times had changed a few times to accommodate everyone concerned.

19

Another setback was the change of weather. For example, the first week at Vailele was windyand the currents were a bit strong so there were few fishing activities in the first four days. The work here at Vailele was then carried out for a week and a half and during nighttime of the first week there were not many diving fishers due to the full moon, except for a few that collected invertebrates. Wind and strong currents also delayed work at Gagaifo Village as well and it then had to be carried out for nearly three weeks.

1.10 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

The thesis is composed of six chapters. Chapter one consists of the introduction, the problem statement, objectives and discusses the methods used in the fieldwork. The second chapter is a review of literature relating to the topic focusing on the Pacific region. It explains the status of coastal and nearshore ecosystems in the Pacific Islands and the human and natural impacts that affect these areas.

Chapter three reviews the literature but concentrate particularly on Samoa, mainly on Upolu Island where the research sites are located. First it provides background information on Samoa concerning its population, economy and basic features of the natural environment. The second part describes the coastal ecosystems and biodiversity of Samoa and coastal problems.

The fourth chapter identifies the case study areas and locations. It discusses the coastal ecosystems of the four village sites and their situations as well as the impacts of human activities on these ecosystems.

In chapter five the nearshore marine biodiversity of the study areas is described and the problems that influence these ecosystems and biodiversity are evaluated.

The last chapter concludes and sums up the thesis as well as stating some recommendations for further research and actions. These are to address problems faced by coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity of particular villages, but also more widely to all areas in Samoa and others in the Pacific Islands.

20

CHAPTER TWO HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC

REGION

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Islands of the Pacific have limited mineral and other terrestrial resources and they depend greatly on coastal and marine resources for a large proportion of their social and economicneeds. According to FAO (1994) 47% of the world’s fisheries production occurs in the Asia-Pacific region, which is also the centre of global mariculture that has major consequences for coastal habitats and coastal water quality (UNEP, 1996). In the Pacific, subsistence fisheries involve a large variety of species such as finfish, molluscs, crustaceans, algae and other groups (FAO, 2002).

This chapter focuses on the importance of coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity and associated problems caused by natural and human activities in the small Island developing states (SIDS) in the Pacific region.

2.2 COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY OF PACIFIC ISLANDS

The coastal and nearshore ecosystems of the Pacific Islands cover a wide range of biodiversity that people and other organisms depend upon.

Burke et al. (2001), stated that coastal and nearshore ecosystems:

host the world’s primary ports of commerce

are the primary producers of fish, shellfish and seaweed for both human and animal consumption

are considerable source of fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, household products and construction materials

encompass a broad range of habitat types

store and cycle nutrients

21

harbour a wealth of species and genetic diversity

filter pollutants from inland freshwater systems

help to protect shorelines from erosion and storms and

used for human settlement, development and many other needs.

The heavy dependence of Pacific Islands on coastal and nearshore ecosystems puts pressure on the equilibrium and survival of the resources and biodiversity of these areas. Pacific Islands vary in their ecological, geological and geographical nature of origins between the high islands of Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa and the smaller low-lying Islands and atolls such as those of Tonga, Nauru, Niue, Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu. However, they face similar consequences of environmental issues due to their comparable island ecosystems and climates and the high dependence on coastal zone resources.

2.3 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES

The maximum elevation of many Small Island Developing States (SIDS) ranges from 1–5 metres above mean sea level and this makes these Islands entirely coastal in terms of systems interaction, their influence by the sea, their geographical disposition and their relative relief (Maharaj, c.2001). Consequently, such small island states depend disproportionately on coastal fisheries and marine organisms for survival compared to high Islands that have other terrestrial alternative sources of food and ample land for agriculture and farming.

The coastal zones of the Pacific region are dependent upon the climate and physical characteristics such as oceanographic processes that determine variations in coastal zone characteristics (Gillie, 1994). Coastal zone ecosystems are particularly susceptible to changes due to natural hazards and human activities.

Beaches are vital and extensively developed along coasts and are the most mobile of coastal environments (Sherwood and Howorth, 1996). Human developments along beaches can change habitats and beaches. For example, Burne (1991) explained that jetties, breakwaters and other

22

structures can upset the natural equilibrium of coastal zones and sometimes cause disastrous impacts.

Coasts and beaches are also significant natural ecosystems that offer attractive resources for the development of the tourism industry within the Pacific region. Tourism is earning an increasingly large proportion of income for many Pacific Islands and is currently a popular development alternative as there are few income earning opportunities in the resource impoverished nations of the Pacific that depend largely on agriculture, forestry, fisheries and a few manufacturing industries. The World Tourism Organization estimated the total tourism receipts in the Pacific Islands to be about 25% of total export earnings (FAO, 1994).

In the Pacific, especially in Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa, almost all their tourist facilities are along the coasts and beaches and depend on coastal resources as a major attraction. In Fiji, for example, most of the resorts are located along the southwest coast of Viti Levu and in the Mamanucas and the Yasawa Island groups in the west. In terms of tourist activities, sport or game fishing and diving are significant economic components of tourism in the Pacific (FAO, 1994). The World Bank (c.2001) noted that in Palau and Kiribati tourism is based primarily on marine-based activities such as diving and sports fishing.

2.4 CORALS AND REEFS

Corals are complex symbiotic ecosystems that depend on clean water and sunlight to provide food through photosynthesis for growth. “Many other invertebrates, vertebrates, and plants live in close association to the scleractinian/dead corals, with tight resource coupling and recycling, allowing coral reefs to have extremely high productivity and biodiversity, such that they are referred to as the Tropical Rainforest of the Oceans” (Odyssey Expeditions, 2001).

Coral reefs support many marine organisms in shallow tropical waters, such as finfish, shellfish and mainly those within the inshore areas and lagoons. Coral reefs are biologically rich ecosystems and provide some of the highest levels of total (gross) productivity on earth (Bryant et al., 1998).

23

Corals and reefs are fragile but are fundamental ecosystems for our Islands and people’s livelihood, “…without reefs many atoll countries and most tourist beaches in the Pacific region would not exist,” (SPREP, 1996).

Corals and reefs provide sanctuaries for marine species, offer science potential medicine, protect coasts and also support economies especially of Pacific Islands for example in the tourism industry. Hinrichsen (1998) explained that nearly a third of all fish species live on coral reefs, reefs, nearby seagrass beds and mangrove swamps for critical stages in their life cycle. Coral reefs also are the most unique features in the Pacific Islands because coral reefs created white sandy beaches and act as wave breakers preventing coastal erosion (World Bank, c.2001).

2.5 COASTAL VEGETATION

Coastal or littoral forest vegetation, including coastal wetlands and mangrove swamps, provide natural protection to coastal areas in the Pacific. The Indo-Pacific distribution of mangrove species follows a pattern with a decline in species from east to west. Pillai (1990) reported 37 mangrove species in Papua New Guinea, 26 in the Solomon Islands and 8 in Fiji (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001) and 3 species were recorded by Whistler (2002) in Samoa.

Mangrove and nearshore ecosystems are significant because they also support the local communities’ subsistence way of life and provide cash income to supplement their daily livelihood. In Fiji the commercial evaluation of mangrove ecosystems showed that mangrove associated fisheries provided subsistence supply of about 8.76 million kg of fish. This amounted to 60% of the total subsistence fisheries with a market price of FJ$17.52 million in 1983 (Maharaj, c.2001).

The mangroves and coastal vegetation protect inland areas from strong winds and waves by acting as wave and windbreakers thus minimizing negative effects of flooding and erosion especially during natural hazards like tsunamis and tropical cyclones. In Samoa in the past, mangroves were more extensive and often fronting and protecting sand beaches. However, their removal for firewood and other purposes may have contributed to coastal erosion (Richmond, 1991).

24

Mangrove communities are nurseries for many marine organisms and other living things, such as small finfish, shellfish, crustaceans, birds and insects, which depend on leaf litter/nutrients for food. Mangrove communities as nurseries have close links with nearshore species. For example, a study in New Caledonia indicated that about 262 species were collected in mangroves and 735 from nearby coral reefs. This illustrates that mangroves are important breeding areas for nearshore marine species (Viles and Spencer, 1995).

The mangrove swamp at Vaiusu Bay in Samoa was a major nursery ground for mullet but this was seriously degraded due to pollution from the former Vaitoloa rubbish Dump along this Bay plus wastes from nearby Vaitele industries. As a result annual mullet catch declined ten-fold in the past five years (Klinkhamers, 1992).

Coastal littoral species are also crucial ecological and cultural resources. As stressed by Thaman (1994) and Whistler (1996) these are perhaps the most wellknown and most useful of the plants available to Pacific Island people.

2.6 IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES AND OTHER MARINE SPECIES

In the Pacific Islands fisheries and marine resources are vital and play a significant role in people’s livelihood. It is stated that the Pacific region/ocean is the largest continuous marine habitat on earth and is the home to incredible marine biodiversity including a wide range of large marine mammals such as whales, dolphins, porpoise, dugongs and marine turtles, (SPREP, 2003).

Fisheries is one of the main sources of protein in Pacific communities especially for low lying Islands and atolls, for example Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu. On atolls for instance, fishing is the primary source of food and accounts for 90% of their protein intake. In Tuvalu and Kiribati each person eats about 575 grams of whole fish daily, which is, nearly twice the 300 grams needed for requirements (Zann, 1983). In large islands like Fiji and Samoa people’s average intake accounts for 246 and 120 grams of fish respectively, because there are other alternative sources of protein available (Zann, 1983).

25

Traditionally the shore, lagoon, reef and a few miles beyond the reef are the main fishing areas for Pacific Island communities. Limited resources and development of cash economies in the Pacific have turned people to fisheries as another income earning commodity. Commercial reef fisheries in French Polynesia supply the main Island of Tahiti, which contains half of the territory’s population. At about 40% of the fish sold in Tahiti markets were from the atolls of the Tuamotu Archipelago (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Fish and other marine species like shellfish, sea cucumbers and a range of other organisms are important for subsistence and commercial uses in many Pacific Islands. A study by FAO (2002) stated in the World Bank (c.2001) identified significant resources in some Pacific Islands (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Important coastal marine species resources at surveyed Islands

Country Important Coastal Resources (descending order of importance)

Fiji Finfish, beche de mer, octopus, seaweed, lobster, mud crab, and various bivalve �molluscs. Tonga Finfish, octopus, lobster, beche de mer, turbo, giant clams, seaweed and anadara. Samoa Finfish (especially surgeonfish, grouper, mullet, carangids, rabbit fish), octopus, giant clams, beche

de mer, turbo, and crab. SolomonIslands

Finfish, beche de mer, trochus, giant clam, lobster, turbo and mangroves

Palau Finfish, giant clams, mangrove crab, lobster, turtle and beche de mer. FAO (2002)

Table 2.1 shows that finfish is the most vital category, particularly species like surgeonfish, grouper, mullet and rabbitfish. In the Melanesian Islands of Fiji and the Solomons, bêche-de-mer is very important for local consumption and export. Other species frequently caught include octopus, giant clams and crabs such as mangrove crabs in Palau and mud crabs in Fiji. Essential small shellfishes include the turbo (Turbo spp.) in Tonga and Samoa and a variety of bivalves in Fiji. Seaweeds and lobsters are also vital in these Islands for sale and consumption.

Commercial fishery products within the Pacific include reef and deep slope fish (43% of total weight), coastal pelagic fish (18%), shell products – trochus, green snail and pearl shell (9%), crustaceans (8%), sea cucumber (7%) and esturine fish (6%) (FAO, 2002). Coastal commercial fisheries compared to subsistence fisheries are smaller and have a restricted range of species

26

although it may still be substantial, for example in Fiji, fish market statistics shows over 100 species of finfish and 50 species of invertebrates (FAO, 2002).

2.6.1 Finfishes

Subsistence and artisanal fishery is often used but much of the inshore catches are not recorded commercially. The inshore receive the enormous impact from human exploitation and according to Adams et al. (c.1998) up to 80% weight of fishery products caught by Pacific Islanders does not enter the cash economy. According to Watson (1984) the estimated annual harvest of finfish is between 11,300 and 17,200 tons, (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Estuarine and mangrove fisheries are important, mostly to Melanesian countries particularly to Papua New Guinea and to a lesser extent Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji, as these countries have larger river systems compared to smaller Islands of Polynesia and Micronesia (Dalzell et al.,1995).

The dominant reef finfish landings in the Pacific include the emperors (Lethrinidae), for example the large catch of Lethrinus nebulosus in New Caledonia and Fiji (Dalzell et al., 1992; Anon, 1994b in Adams et al., 1996). Caillart (1998a) recorded that the Lethrinus miniatus is the main catch in French Polynesia (Dalzell et al., 1995).

The other common species of finfish landings include the surgeonfish (Acanthuridae) like Nasounicornis that is fished throughout the region, Acanthurus dussumieri and N. brevirostris, (Lock 1986a in Dalzell et al., 1995). Lutjanus gibbus, Siganus lineatus are commonly caught on many Islands as well as the Bolbometopon muricatum, Lethrinus ramak, Hipposcarus longiceps andSiganus canaliculatus (Dalzell et al., 1995). Other regular species include the snappers (Lutjanidae), parrotfishes (Scaridae), groupers (Serranidae), goatfishes (Mullidae), jacks, mullet, rabbitfishes and squirrelfishes (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Export of fish takes place from many Islands of the Pacific, for example live reef fish exports from French Polynesia, Cook Islands, Samoa, Kiribati, Solomon Islands and Fiji mainly to Japan and Hong Kong for aquarium trade (Dalzell et al., 1995). Pyle (1993) listed the following families of

27

fish that are important for aquarium trade from the Pacific Islands: the Cirrhitidae, Gobiidae,Balistidae, Beniidae, Pomacentridae, Pomacanthidae, Chaetodontidae, Acanthuridae, Labridaeand Serranidae (Dalzell et al., 1995). In the group Pomacentridae, the most common aquarium export included the damselfishes, Chrysiptera cyanea, Chromis albipectoralis and Dascyllusaruanus from Palau (Dalzell et al., 1995).

Richards 1993 in Adams et al. (1996) stated that reef fish such as coral trout, some groupers and Napoleon wrasse from the Papua New Guinea coast are exported to Hong Kong for the restaurant trade. There was also demand for stonefish Synanceia verrucosa and S. horrida for Asian traditional medicines and consumption (Richards, 1993 in Dalzell et al., 1995). Johannes (1991) noted a similar range of fish exports from Palau to Hong Kong. However, there was closure to this fishery export due to the concern over levels of fishing pressure (Dalzell et al.,1995).

2.6.2 Shellfishes and other Marine Species

Trochus is significant for consumption on Islands and has become economically vital in some Pacific Islands. Many Pacific countries engage in the trochus trade, including Fiji, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Micronesia, Marshall Islands and others. Between 1980 and 1997 New Caledonia and the Solomon Islands were the two major trochus producing countries in the world with an average annual production of 349 and 578 tonnes (Eltayab, 2004).

Trochus and pearl shells are exported for button manufacture and furniture inlay (Adams et al.,1996). In Vanuatu trochus shells is used for making buttons and inlay and has been the single most important commercial marine product for many coastal villages. In the 1980s trochus population were over-harvested and their production declined (Hickey and Johannes, 2004b).

Other vital marine species of commercial value in some Islands include sea cucumbers and sea urchins. Sea cucumbers are harvested and processed into bêche-de-mer (trepang) as commercial species in many Pacific Islands for export mainly to Asian markets. In Fiji, catches of bêche-de-mer reached a peak of approximately 7000 tonnes live weight in 1988 (King, 1995).

28

In 1996 from January to May, the estimated total number of sea cucumbers harvested in Rota Island, Northern Marianas was 103,193 with an estimated total wet weight of 34,242 kg exported mainly to Hong Kong (Trianni, 2002).

Fishers in local markets sell sea urchins, and the sea cucumbers are harvested for the gonads or roe in Samoa whilst the sandfish (Holothuria scabra) is the only eaten species in Fiji (Adams 1992a in Dalzell et al., 1995).

2.7 IMPACTS AFFECTING COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

Natural disasters, the satisfaction of growing community needs and economic developments directly and indirectly destroy coasts and marine biodiversity and leads to a range of coastal issues. These include:

natural hazards

mangrove destruction and degradation

coastal deforestation and de-vegetation

coastal reclamation

waste disposal and pollution

urban and infra-structural developments

sedimentation and runoff

over-exploitation of marine resources

coral reef destruction and marine exploitation

crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) outbreaks

high population density and urbanization

agriculture and farming.

Most of these problems that are major concerns in many Pacific Islands’ coasts and nearshore ecosystems are discussed below. The increasing demand and uncontrollable uses of Pacific Island resources at an accelerating rate will have a negative impact on the coastal and marine resources as well as affecting the local communities. The Earth Summit report 1992 stated that land-based sources contributed to 70% of marine pollution (Quarrie, 1992).

29

Human developments and population growth coupled with natural disasters increase the pressure on coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems and biodiversity. These concerns intensify the vulnerability of island environments to natural catastrophes causing coastal erosion, coral destruction and many other problems that lead to impoverishing government economies and the livelihoods of people.

Loss of native species is another environmental concern for Pacific Islands due to habitat loss, introduced invasive species, over-harvesting and many other factors as a result of many human alterations. According to Zann (2000) local extinction of marine species may have a major impact on the structure of marine communities and functioning of marine ecosystems.

2.7.1 Tropical Cyclones

Natural catastrophes like tropical cyclones cause severe damage in the Pacific region particularly on the southwest Pacific in groups as Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, Niue and to a lesser extent towards the eastern Pacific.

In Samoa, Aganoa Bay which contained one of the few ‘coral gardens’ in Samoa, was destroyed by cyclone Ofa in 1990. The rubble left behind after the cyclone was covered with algae for months (Chase and Veitayaki, 1992). Cyclone Ofa in 1990 caused unprecedented damage to property, agriculture, forests and reefs (FAO, 1994) and cyclone Val in 1991 exacerbated these impacts.

The islands of Tahiti further east of the Pacific experienced five cyclones between January and April of 1983 more than in the preceding 150 years. Then sea level rose 4–5 meters with waves 8–10 metres resulting in many villages being flooded to the extent that their water lens became salted. Furthermore, large blocks of corals were torn from the reefs and thrown onto the reef flats (UNESCAP, 2000).

In Pohnpei, Micronesia, a severe cyclone took place in 1997 and massive landslides occurred afterwards due to large-scale clearance of upland forest for commercial kava plantations.

30

Consequently, people were killed and destruction of plantations was severe and so was the damage to coastal and coral reef communities (UNESCAP, 2000).

2.7.2 Global Warming and Coral Bleaching

Mitchell et al. (2003) reported that on a global average sea level has risen about 1–2mm per year but could be much higher in some Pacific Islands by approximately 10 times. For example, in Tonga it has risen about 20 mm per year and 22 mm per year in the Solomon Islands (South etal., 2004).

High sea temperatures and hot climate have serious disastrous effects on marine biodiversity. Increasing sea surface temperatures due to El Niño superimposed on global warming leads to coral stress or coral bleaching, which has resulted in the death of many coral colonies. In French Polynesia during El Niño years of 1982 and 1983 there was major destruction in lagoons and outer slopes caused by six cyclones (Salvat, 2002). The marine scientists symposium held in Australia in 1997 and 1998 reported that coral bleaching episodes of 1997 to 1998 were the most widespread and the most severe in recorded history and as a result marine species dependent on corals for food also suffered (UNESCAP, 2000).

The high sea temperature in 1994 killed over 90% of the living corals of American Samoa from the inter-tidal zone to a depth of 10 metres and as a result fish catches declined due to coral death (UNESCAP, 2000). In Samoa high dead coral cover was caused by coral breakage and bleaching from previous years and the crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) may have been contributed too (Lovell et al., 2004).

Coral bleaching associated with global warming had been a massive killer of corals within the Pacific region. Palau experienced massive bleaching in 1998 when 30% of the reefs were heavily bleached with 75–85% of soft coral mortality and 30–50% of Acropora (Richmond et al.,2002).

31

Salvat (2002) recorded bleaching in Cook Islands in which 80% of Acropora was bleached on Rarotonga in March 2000. In February of the same year, up to 90% of the Goniastrea and Platygyra colonies were bleached in Tonga and Fiji (Salvat, 2002).

In 2000 Fiji suffered massive coral bleaching: Cumming et al. (2002) reported that 64% of all scleractinian corals at the surveyed sites were either partially or fully bleached at all areas except those on the far north of Vanua Levu Island. About 80% of colonies at southern sites were bleached, (South et al., 2004). In Samoa bleaching of shallow water corals reported by Skelton (unpublished) from the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve was caused by extreme low tides (South etal., 2004).

2.7.3 Coastal Deforestation and De-vegetation

People alter coastal ecosystems to suit their lifestyles. In mangroves, wetlands and other coastal ecosystems habitat destruction leads to the loss and decline of particular living things such as birds, snails, insects and other organisms as well as the decline of nearshore marine biodiversity.

The biodiversity of the Pacific Islands started to decline when the first humans settled these Islands. For example, the Polynesian settlers in the Marquesas exterminated 8 of the 20 species of sea birds including shearwaters, petrels and boobies. In addition 14 of 16 land birds, mainly the flightless rails, pigeons, doves, parrots and songbirds, became extinct (UNESCAP, 2000).

Globally, even though there is no exact total calculation of how much mangrove area has been lost, Kelleher et al. (1995) estimated that 50% of the world’s mangrove forests have been lost (Burke et al. 2001). According to MacKinnon (1997) Papua New Guinea lost 8% of its mangrove area from 1992 to 1993 (Burke et al. 2001), a rapid and huge loss for such a small period of time.

In Fiji up to 40% of mangrove forests have been destroyed or reclaimed in the past 30 to 40 years which is high, for example destruction and land filling of large mangrove swamps adjacent Lami Dump for container storage (South et al., 2004).

32

Reclamation is another critical problem of coastal areas within the Pacific Islands due to the high number of people settling along the coast. Mangroves were common around the Suva area but due to urban expansion along the coastline such as the Suva harbour, only a few embayments of mangroves remain (SPREP, 1994b). Lal (1984) stated that by 1980 reclamation for sugarcane and some for rice cultivation accounted for over 74% of reclamation in Fiji.

Due to high degradation of littoral vegetation, shorelines, coastal and nearshore biodiversity were exposed and subjected to strong winds and waves resulting in coastal erosion. Loss or removal of mangroves and other coastal plants leads to habitat loss for many living organisms as well as causing decreases in marine food production. Large-scale deforestation contributed to the exploitation of nearshore shellfish beds and coral reefs in the Solomon Islands (Hinrichsen, 1998).

The Solomon Island mangroves are under great threat from logging, mining and reclamation for human settlement, waste disposal and over-exploitation by traditional users (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001). Cutting of coastal vegetation and mangroves are common in the Pacific Islands not only for settlement, development and landfills but also for firewood. Mangroves have been logged and used as firewood by commercial suppliers at Auki in Malaita as well as being felled by villagers for traditional use near Langa Langa Lagoon south of Auki (Pillai and Sirikolo, 2001) thus increasing sedimentation that smothers corals and reefs.

2.7.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution

Although waste disposal in highly industrialized countries still far surpasses that of the Pacific countries, the level of disposal is an issue due to the small sizes and the fragile ecosystems of Islands. Waste disposal and problems like domestic wastes (consisting of sewage, rubbish and industrial effluents) contributed to the increase of coastal pollution. Imported products have increased litter including plastics and other non-degradable materials commonly used in the Pacific Islands nowadays (Table 2.2).

33

Table 2.2: Waste disposal figures for selected Pacific Island countries Country Population Average Waste

Generation rate (kg/capita/day) Biodegradable content (%)

Cook Islands (Rarotonga) 19600 0.19 35FSM (Pohnpei) 134000 0.38 19Fiji (Lautoka) 825000 0.92 68Kiribati (South Tarawa) 76000 0.33 20Marshall Islands (Majuro) 51000 0.38 46Papua New Guinea 4400000 0.41 62Samoa (Apia) 170000 1.05

0.526159

Solomon Islands (Honiara) 385000 0.220.38

6520

Tonga (Nuku’alofa) 97000 0.820.68

4762

Tuvalu (Funafuti) 10000 0.43 52Vanuatu (Port Vila) 175000 0.65 71Average 0.55 49Notes: collated from studies carried out, 1996 – 1999, by various organizations at bracketed cities. Source: JICA (2001) in Thaman et al. (2003)

Table 2.2 illustrates high average waste in the urban centres of Apia (Samoa), Lautoka (Fiji), Nuku’alofa (Tonga) and Port Vila (Vanuatu). As reported by Thaman et al. (2003), comparison of the results of a study conducted between 1990 and 1994 with a SPREP study in 1999 shows that generation rates of waste in small Pacific Island developing states have increased from about 0.42 kg/capita/day to about 0.66 kg/capita/day.

Similarly, studies by Crennan and Bery (2002) shows a 57% increase in waste generation within nine years and this attribute mainly to the increase of paper and plastic products especially disposable nappies and plastics (Thaman et al., 2003).

Plastics discarded carelessly by people and washed down by rivers and brought in by the sea pollute beaches and affect marine mammals and other organisms. For example, the ingestion of plastic bags can kill cetaceans and turtles (SPREP, 2003).

Sewage, domestic waste and importation of canned and wrapped products create rubbish that generates problems on Islands that can not afford recycling plants. Most Islands depend on landfills and Dumps, which are commonly located in and contribute to the degradation of coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity. Erakor lagoon in Vanuatu receives high nutrients from the

34

urban sewage in Vila, which causes the frequent occurrence of phytoplankton bloom due to the long lagoonal water residence times (Brodie et al. 1990).

There have also been cases of infectious disease outbreaks due to the contamination of shellfishand other marine organisms by sewage waste. For example, in Kiribati cholera broke out in 1977–1978 and caused the death of 21 people as a result of water pollution and contamination of shellfish (Maung 1979 in Brodie et al. 1990). Johannes et al. (1979), recorded that a study of Tarawa’s lagoon and shellfish quality showed widespread contamination. As a result of this study a sewage system was installed for Betio in which waste is now discharged into the open ocean instead of the lagoon (Brodie et al. 1990). Cholera has also been a problem in Truk in the Federated States of Micronesia for some time (Brodie et al. 1990).

People see mangrove communities as unattractive wasteland swamps that are muddy, murky and waterlogged, with a foul smell. Because of these perceptions and lack of knowledge, people use mangroves and swamps as dumping sites, source of firewood, reclaimed land for settlement and many other activities that exploit these particular areas and organisms living there. In Koror State, Palau, a landfill located adjacent to a mangrove forest caused pollution due to landfill leachate that contaminated the marine ecosystem and water resources of surrounding areas (Maiava and Otobed, 1994).

Mangroves in or near urban areas are also commonly used as dumping sites thus causing serious problems in terms of the decline and destruction of mangrove communities and nearshore ecosystems. Water in Suva harbour is toxic from untreated domestic and industrial effluents (Hinrichsen, 1998).

Other developments such as industrial wastes or chemicals drained to nearshore areas also put pressure on these fragile ecosystems. In 1979, a buried pipeline transporting marine diesel oil in Apra, Guam, leaked about 10,000 gallons of oil into the mangrove community and over 13,000 mangroves and a range of other marine organisms died (Brodie and Morrison, 1984).

35

In many Pacific Islands industrial wastewater commonly drains onto the coast and inshore marine areas. Cripps (1992) reported that wastewater from the Lautoka sugar mill was high in biological oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids and oil. According to SPC et al. (1984), effluent from the Labasa sugar mill resulted in repeated incidents of fish kills in the Labasa River (Thaman etal., 2003).

Pollution of the sea by many terrestrial developments and disposal of waste pose threats to nearshore resources. Zann (1994) noted the problem of heavy metal pollution in urban centres like Pago Pago, American Samoa, where industrial wastewater contained high levels of arsenic, chromium, copper, nickel, mercury, zinc and lead.

Naidu and Morrison (1994) recorded that shellfish and sediments of Suva harbour area were severely contaminated with mercury, lead and copper (Thaman et al., 2003). Also, traces of metals were found in contaminated sediments and shellfish in Suva (South et al., 2004). Tamata et al. (1993) reported that increasing levels of tributyltin (TBT) caused imposex in female neogastropods around the Suva area (South et al., 2004).

2.7.5 Mining

Sandy beaches need to maintain their equilibrium with wave action as beaches can be easily changed by influences such as ocean/sea variations or natural hazards like tidal waves and cyclones. Human interference with coastal ecosystems can upset this equilibrium by building unplanned seawalls, sand mining and cutting of coastal plants. In Kiribati and French Polynesia even though coral and sand mining was banned it still continued and resulted to the disappearance of beaches near urban areas (Salvat, 2002).

In the Pacific mineral resources are limited but people depend on the coastal ecosystems for food, household necessities, settlement and infra-structural development resulting in exploitation of coastal resources (Table 2.3).

36

Table 2.3: Exploitation of coastal materials in Pacific Island countries

Country Coastal mineral potential

Is coastal mineral extraction a problem?

Are there alternative sources of materials?

Is coastal stability a critical issue?

Cook Islands * *** Yes ***FSM * ** Yes **Fiji *** * Yes **Kiribati --- *** No ***Marshall Islands --- ** No ***Niue * * No ***Palau --- * --- **Samoa * *** Yes **Solomon Islands *** ** Yes ***Tonga * *** Yes **Tuvalu --- *** No ***Vanuatu ** ** Yes ***--- Not available * Low ** Medium *** High Source: Howard (1997) in World Bank (c.2001)

Table 2.3 summarises the exploitation levels of coastal materials in some Pacific Islands. High Islands like Solomon Islands, Fiji and Vanuatu have high potential and alternative sources of coastal minerals. The level of exploitation of these resources is not so dramatic in these large high Islands compared to low-lying and small islands.

Table 2.3 shows that small Islands like Samoa, Tonga and Cook Islands have low coastal mineral potential but extraction of coastal resources is high. The problem is similar in the smaller low-lying atolls of Marshal Islands, Tuvalu and Kiribati with medium to high levels of exploitation. These Islands – Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Palau and Kiribati – have no other alternative resources of such materials. The underlying factor is that all of these Pacific Islands, whether high or low, are facing coastal instability. There is thus great need to address human activities and natural disasters concerning problems with coastal stability, especially in light of the potential negative impacts of global warming and sea level rise (Howard, 1997 in World Bank, c.2001).

Globally, dredging caused 80-90% of all material dumped at sea including liquid, suspended particles and solid materials that may affect benthic organisms by smothering and destroying habitat (GESAMP, 1990). Dredging stirs up contaminated materials and re-introduces disposal problems or changes the water circulation pattern.

37

Chemical pollutants like petroleum or diesel tainted and increased contamination of finfish, shellfish and other marine organisms (GESAMP, 1990). In Kolonia, Pohnpei and Kosrae, dredging and interruption of tidal flow by infra-structure projects have led to silting of harbours, reefs and mangrove swamps (SPREP, 1996).

Dredging and sand mining are problems for sandy beaches which lead also to the loss of marine organisms. In Fiji sand mining was carried out from a back reef area of the lagoon in Laucala Bay for cement production and it was suggested that this contributed to heavy mortality of turtle grass (Syringodium isoetifolium) and fish declines due to direct loss of this seagrass (Lal, 1984). In Solomon Islands, as a result of a prograding of a section of the coastline adjacent to the western side of the Lungga River Delta, Ranadi beach in Honiara has been experiencing erosion for many years (Gillie, 1992).

These problems worsened if sand mining is not sustainable, although in some islands it has grown to a large-scale or commercial activity. Tappin (1993) and Howorth (1997) noted that beach sand in Tonga has been removed at rates 2 – 5 times higher than the natural regeneration rate (World Bank, c.2001).

Howorth (1997) also reported that in the mid-1990s the annual extraction of sand – a key cement ingredient – averaged 15,000 cubic metres in Tongatapu and 70,000 cubic metres in Suva, Fiji (World Bank, c.2001). In Samoa, apart from large-scale sand mining in Apia there has been periodic mining of beach and beach ridge deposits near Salamumu and Lefaga; flood delta deposits at the Vaisigano River mouth in Apia; and the spit at the mouth of Tuafaleloa Stream near Solosolo Village (Richmond, 1991).

Mining for minerals is not a huge issue for the smaller Pacific Islands compared to countries with rich mineral deposits, although problems of mine tailings have caused great concern in Papua New Guinea and to a lesser extent New Caledonia and Fiji (Brodie et al. 1990).

The mine tailings from the Panguna mine in Bougainville, for example, used to discharge high levels of copper in the sediment of the Jaba River and in the 1980s the Jaba River was dead with

38

a decline of fish in its tributaries (Brodie et al., 1990). Before the Bougainville mine was closed in the early 1990s, about 135, 000 metric tonnes of mine tailings had been dumped into the Jaba River daily (Hinrichsen, 1998).

Land clearance and disposal of wastes near or in rivers contributed to negative impacts on the coast and nearshore marine. Mowbray (1986b) recorded that in June 1984 free cyanide was being released into the Ok Tedi River in Papua New Guinea and caused a large fish and prawn kill at the area as well as disrupting the life of local people (Brodie et al., 1990).

Most contaminants are from inland activities such as logging, mining and agriculture using pesticides and many other pollutants. The expanding Emperor gold mine in Vatukoula, Fiji, raised serious concerns as evidence of cyanide pollution has been detected in streams and water resources of the area (Thaman et al., 2003). As stated by Manner et al. (1984, 1985) and Thaman and Hassal (2000) the problem of cadmium pollution is associated with the processing of phosphate rock during mining operations in Nauru (Thaman et al., 2003).

2.7.6 Infra-structural Impacts

Manufacturing, dams, roads and other infrastructure and services assist Island countrieseconomically. However, these developments have great impacts on coastal and nearshore areas, posing danger to these ecosystems. Techniques for coastal protection are intended as means to minimize sand erosion but the designs used ended up washing away beaches. In New Caledonia, Benezit (1981) stated that construction work on the extension of an artificial shoreline at Noumea harbour resulted in effluent from the processing plant filling the nearby mangroves and estuarine areas (Brodie et al. 1990).

In Kiribati, erosion in the early 1980s was quite dramatic along the beachfront immediately east of Bairiki harbour. According to Howorth (1983) in July 1982 the sand lost from this area had been supplementing beaches on the east, and even coconut trees at the beachhead disappeared (it is not clear where or how they disappeared). In place, loose coral boulders were used as a seawall but in two weeks time this was lost. People then constructed a gabion basket seawall (Howorth, 1983).

39

In American Samoa development activities on the foreshore and backshore caused shoreline erosion. These activities include boat channel paths being bulldozed across reef flats. Severe erosion occurred mainly from reef flats in areas like Fagasau Bay, Ava Point and Alofau in American Samoa (SPREP, 1994b). In Samoa the 65 hectares of Vaiusu mangrove wetlands were partially cleared for the main road and used for the former rubbish Dump at Vaitoloa (Klinckhamers, 1992).

Lal (1984) noted that the building of the coastal road led to sedimentation of adjacent fringing coral reefs in Fiji (Brodie et al., 1990). The building of the Pacific Harbour Resort on Viti Levu in Fiji led to heavy input of sediment into estuaries in the 1970s and resulted to the killing of many coral colonies around the mouth of the Qaraniqio River (Lal, 1984).

A road project in the early 1990s on the southern shores of Guam caused heavy sedimentation that affected a 10 km section of fringing reefs killing all the corals (Richmond et al., 2002). Also in Guam, the main power generation facilities are located on Cabras Island near Apra Harbor north of the main town, where discharge water, which also contained cleaning chemicals to cool generators killed corals in the process (Richmond et al., 2002).

2.7.7 Sedimentation and other Streams/Rivers Link Problems with Coasts

Streams link terrestrial activities with the coast and nearshore marine area by sedimentation andthe transportation of materials to the coast. Rivers and streams have great impacts on the coastal areas because these provide a connection and conduit for land-based materials with the ocean and marine life. A study by The University of the South Pacific showed that average faecal coliform concentrations of most Suva creeks greatly exceed international standards (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Poisons, chemicals and land-based wastes washed down by rivers also caused the smothering of corals and reefs, killing other marine life. Occasionally fish caught off Suva harbour have an oily and kerosene flavour and also marine organisms found in the harbour have been degraded (UNESCAP, 2003b).

40

Consequently, people around Suva were advised not to consume local shellfish from surrounding areas due to the danger of hepatitis because of contamination and sewage waste absorbed by shellfish. However, the local low-income residents still use areas like Laucala Bay as a source of food (UNESCAP, 2003b).

Sediment runoff caused by land clearance and logging is a major hazard for coral growth. However, unsustainable logging with authorization from governments in Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands had been carried out and licences have been granted to harvest up to 97% of the existing rainforests in Solomon Islands (UNESCAP, 2000). Consequently loss of biodiversity occurs among animals and forest species, and in addition sedimentation smothers corals and other organisms of coastal and nearshore ecosystems.

Deforestation and upland activities increase sedimentation and pollution that destroy the inshore marine and species. For example, logging in the upper Navua river catchment in Fiji has resulted in silting up of important parts of the Upper Navua River Gorge, a Fiji designated site under the Ramsar Wetland Convention (Thaman et al., 2003). In Tonga due to the growth of butter pumpkin production for export over the past years in Tongatapu, the amount of fertilizer leachate has increased and polluted the freshwater lens of the Island (Thaman et al., 2003).

In Samoa poor agricultural practices near watershed uplands of the Vaisigano River has led to the shoaling of the Apia harbour by 1.7 metres between 1975 and 1981 and death of the reef adjacent to the river mouth (Klinckhamers, 1992). Clearing of forests and burning of grassland in New Caledonia for grazing and agriculture increased erosion and subsequent sedimentation at nearshore areas (Iltis 1979 in Brodie et al. 1990).

2.8 IMPACTS ON NEARSHORE MARINE AND FISHERIES

The inshore area is the most important fishing ground for Pacific communities. Subsistence and artisanal fisheries are significant but much of the inshore catches are not recorded commercially. The inshore areas receive enormous impact from human exploitation and according to Adams etal. (c.1998) up to 80% weight of fishery products caught by Pacific Islanders do not enter the cash economy.

41

Inshore finfish and other seafood have been exploited due to high local fresh fish demand for particular species by foreign markets especially into Asia. The Napoleon or Maori wrasse has been over-fished due to consumption and high commercial value, which highligted a need for controlling its commercial exportation (Sadovy, 2005).

In Fiji, Lal (1983) and Fong (1994) recorded that over-fishing by commercial fishers in urban centres could have been the cause for the decline in mullet landings (Vuki et al., 2000). Fong (1994) also noted the decline in mullet that had been experienced by Sasa villagers in Macuata on Vanua Levu Island (Vuki et al., 2000).

Other commercial marine products currently exploited in the Pacific include trochus (Trochusniloticus), green snail (Turbo marmoratus), black-lip pearl oyster (Pinctada margaritifera), giant clam (Tridacna spp.), eteline snapper and large serranids (Adams and Majkowski 1997 in FAO, 2002).

2.8.1 Over-harvesting and Exploited Species

There are numerous reports of the declines of main species in the Pacific Islands: examples include the reef and lagoon stocks in Palau, noted by Johannes (1981, 1991); reef and lagoon fish in Kiribati, recorded by Yeeting and Wright (1989); bonefish, milkfish and parrotfish in the Cook Islands, (Anon 1988a and Dashwood SPC Fisheries Programme pers. comm.); various grouper stocks in French Polynesia, (Bell, 1980); reef and small pelagic fishes in Samoa (Helm, 1992) and Tokelau (Hooper, 1985 in Dalzell et al., 1995).

Myers (1989) and Hensley and Sherwood (1993) noted that in Guam and Palau the commercial spear-fishers have driven certain reef species like the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometaponmucicatum) and the Napoleon wrasse (Chelinus undulatus) to very low population levels (Dalzell et al., 1995). Kitalong and Dalzell (1994) reported excessive fishing pressure in Palau resulting in the decline of certain fish species such as mullet (Crenimugil crenilabis).

Hensley and Sherwood (1993) analysis of catches between 1982 and 1991 showed large declines of particular species in Guam such as goatfish (Mulloidichthys flavolineatus), parrotfish

42

(Bolbometopon muricatum), wrasse (Chilinus undulatus) and large snappers and groupers (Dalzell et al., 1995).

In Fiji emperor species (Lethrinus) and mullet (Muligidae) have been over-fished and the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometopon) was fished to local extinction in most areas (Sulu et al.,2002). King (1979) also stated that mullet declined dramatically in the Lau Islands of Fulanga and Ono-i-lau in Fiji (Wenzel, 1989).

Important species like turtles, giant clams even marine mammals like whales are increasingly rare or threatened in the Pacific region. These species are significant to many Pacific cultures, like the importance of the whale and dolphin teeth in Fiji and Solomon Islands. Over-fishing of turtles had been experienced throughout the Pacific region. In 1993 Solomon Islands banned the export of turtle shells as well as imposing a closure in harvesting seasons for all turtle species and eggs during nesting seasons of June – August and November – January, (Sulu et al., 2000).

Giant clams had been over-harvested in many Pacific Islands and the export of giant clams was banned in Fiji in 1989 when it was nearly exploited (Wenzel 1989). On many reefs in Fiji the species Tridacna derasa and Tridacna squamosa clams have been over-fished and currently the fishers are targeting the Tridacna maxima, which has been over-harvested in many parts of Fiji (Vuki et al., 2000). The Tridacna gigas and Hippopus hippopus became extinct, (Vuki et al.,2000).

In Solomon Islands commercial development of giant clams was important in the 1970s and 1980s (Sulu et al., 2000). In 1983 Solomon Islands exported about 10.2 tons of adductor meat while the rest of the animal was usually wasted. As a result giant clam exports declined to just 60 kg in 1986. This shows how heavily the stock has been exploited (Sulu et al., 2000).

Shells are valuable, for example turtle shells and the black-lipped pearl that are commercially essential for making handicrafts for the growing tourism industry. Pearl oysters are vital in some Islands, for example the commercially significant species of pearl oysters in Solomon Islands like the blacklip oysters (Pinctada margaritifera), goldlip (P.maxima) and the brownlip (Pteria penguin)

43

(Sulu et al., 2000). The blacklip oyster reached its peak in 1991 when it made up almost 70% of the export (Sulu et al., 2000).

Apart from finfish and shellfish, other marine organisms had been exploited in many Pacific Islands. The black coral used in the jewellery industry has been over-harvested in Tonga (Wenzel, 1989).

Pearl oyster, green snail and grouper have been fished beyond their capability for short-term recovery (Adams and Majkowski, 1997 in FAO, 2002). In Fiji, the collection of many common shells for sale has caused the depletion of the giant triton shell (Charonia tritonis) (Vuki et al.,2000).

Over-harvesting of invertebrates and particular gastropods created crises in many places due to declining exports and their significance for shell value in the ornamental shell trade. These are usually the cowrie species, cones, helmets, volutes, conches and spider shells (King 1995). In Fiji gastropods are gathered to earn money and also the top shell Trochus niloticus has been exported to Asian and European markets (Parkinson 1982 in FAO 2002).

Bêche-de-mer, because of its shallow-water habitat, high export demand and prices has been subjected to rapid commercial exploitation in many Islands. The high wholesale price of the first-grade well prepared sandfish, Holothuria sabra, increase the pressure for over-harvesting of this product (Purcell et al. 2002). Bêche-de-mer has been reported as being over-fished in various islands; for example in 1998 sandfish was nearly extirpated in Togak region in Papua New Guinea (Lokani, 1990 in Uthicke and Conand, 2005).

In the Northern Marianas the sea cucumbers, surf redfish (Actinopyga mauritiana) and the black teatfish (Holothuria whitmaei) were the target products of a commercial company before it moved to Saipan, as sea cucumbers on some areas of Rota Island were over-harvested (Trianni 2002). Richmond (1995) estimated that over 30,000,000 sea cucumbers were harvested during those years, and suggested that areas around Chuuk have yet to recover from the high exploitation rates of the 1920s and 1930s (Trianni, 2002).

44

The black teatfish (Holothuria nobilis), white teatfish (H. fuscogilva) and blackfish (Actinopygamiliaris) were the main exported species from the Solomon Islands in the 1960s and 1970s (Sulu et al., 2000). The collection of sea cucumbers as a commercial commodity reached its peak in 1992 with 175 metric tonne and the trend declined within a decade (Sulu et al., 2000).

2.8.2 Fishing Methods

In many Pacific societies males are mainly involved in fishing for finfish using various methods and canoes, while women participate mainly in reef gleaning and gathering of marine invertebrates and other seafood.

Some factors that have contributed to over-exploitation of lagoons and nearshore marine resources are the increasing efficient fishing methods used due to high demand for fresh fish and commercial uses. Veitayaki (1995) noted that gill nets contributed to the over-exploitation of fish in many parts of Fiji (South et al., 2004). Modern advanced and efficient methods of fishing include various fishing nets, spearing, night diving, use of SCUBA gear and other means that increase pressure on fish resources leading to the decline or over-exploitation of fish and other marine species.

Spear fishing and SCUBA gears were associated with the extinction of Bolbometopon muricatumand Cheilinus undulatus in Guam and large-scale declines of these species in Palau (Dalzell etal., 1995). According to Vuki et al. (2000) the introduction of underwater breathing apparatus and lucrative prices by overseas buyers are the major causes for the over-exploitation of shellfish in Fiji.

Fish corrals set on the reef flat around the Island of Tongatapu in Tonga were made to catch mullet for commercial uses and due to the success of this method the stocks declined (Dalzell etal., 1995). Inner reef fisheries were recorded as fully exploited throughout Tonga due to over-fishing and efficient methods of fishing, which resulted in the decline of mullet and other finfish species thus leading to the ban on commercial fishing in Fanga’uta lagoon between 1975 and 1981. This ban was difficult to maintain and was lifted in 1981 due to pressure from local fishers (Wenzel, 1989).

45

Development projects like loans granted for fishing boats and fishing gear encourage fishers to over-fish stocks using destructive fishing techniques to meet payments (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Destructive fishing methods such as explosives/dynamites, poisons and other efficient techniques used to increase catches are illegal as they exploit finfish and other marine organisms. Dynamite blasting was used to catch short mackerel (Rastrelliger brachysoma) to sell or use as bait in Fiji (South et al., 2004). Destructive fishing with poisons and dynamite has been reported in Tonga, Kiribati and Wallis and Futuna (Salvat, 2002).

Many fishers in the Pacific used to practice the use of toxic plants to poison marine species especially finfish (Table 2.4).

Table 2.4: Plants used as poisons in the Pacific region Scientific name Parts used Description/notes Areas used Barringtonia asiaticaB.speciosa

Seed Tree: active compound is saponin A.Samoa, Fiji, Futuna, French Polynesia, Guam,Vanuatu

Derris elliptica Root, bark,Stems

High-climbing woody liana. Roots contain rotenoids, the most potent of which are rotenone and tephrosin. It was introduced from Asia to the Pacific and is commonly cultivated for rotenone production

A.Samoa, Fiji, Kosrae, New Caledonia, Guam, PNG, Palau, Vanuatu, Samoa

Euphorbia cotinifoliaE.canadensis, E.tannensis

Stems,leaves

Fiji, New Caledonia

Neubergia collina Fruit Steamed fruit is mixed with water Fiji Pittosporum arborenscens Fruit Cooked first Fiji, Tonga Tephrosia piscatorial Leaves Perennial herb Cook Islands, Hawaii, Fiji,

Tahiti, Moorea Source: GIWA Taskteam (2004) in South et al., 2004

Table 2.4 illustrates the main plant poisons used in many villages for fishing. These include the Derris elliptica and Barringtonia asiatica commonly use in American Samoa, Samoa, Fiji, Guam and Vanuatu. Others like the Euphorbia spp., were used in Fiji and New Caledonia and the Tephrosia piscatorial was also used in Fiji as well as the Cook Islands, French Polynesia and Hawaii.

46

Modern destructive chemicals used were the chlorine (often houshehold bleach) and cyanide. Cyanide damage corals and Jones and Steven (1997) stated that high concentration of cyanide kills coral outright (South et al., 2004).

2.9 VULNERABILITY AND THREATS TO CORALS AND REEFS

Corals and reef growth are vulnerable to natural and human actions. Bryant et al. (1998) reported that 36% of global coral reefs are threatened by over-exploitation, 30% by coastal development, 22% by inland pollution and erosion and 12% by marine pollution. Corals are degraded due to physical breakage during fishing and reef gleaning activities in almost all shallow water lagoons. Corals are also accidentally damaged by people walking on them and others have been deliberately taken and broken to remove fish and invertebrates (UNESCAP, 2003a). Fish stocks could recover quickly after being over-fished but corals grow slowly and takes a long time to recover.

Corals are destroyed by commercial sand mining or by other various uses in some Pacific Islands. McCue (2005) mentioned that in the Pacific marine carbonate is mined from back-reefs, lagoons and reef crests usually in water less than 10 metres deep. Montastrea spp. and Poritesspp. are commonly mined as well as Acropora spp. that are usually attached to fine abraded gravel and sand from shallow lagoons (McCue, 2005). Mining of the living coral (Acropora spp.)is a problem in Melanesian countries like the Solomon Islands and particularly in Papua New Guinea, which use this coral type for production of lime used to chew with betel nut (Brown, 1986).

Agriculture and other activities also contribute to coral destruction. For example, it was suggested that the use of pesticides caused the outbreak of the crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci). This outbreak was experienced by many Pacific Islands as it killed large areas of coral in American Samoa and Samoa as well as in the Cook Islands (Wenzel, 1989).

Destructive fishing, tourism activities, boat anchors and sedimentation are just a few impacts that people have on corals and reefs. Sedimentation smothers corals and is a fundamental problem

47

that needs to be addresed especially with development. Damage to corals was also caused by siltation from shoreline developments at Nuku’alofa harbour (Wenzel, 1989).

Terry and Thaman (2001) reported extensive mortality of coral reefs and disappearance of associated marine organisms near the Shangri-La Fijian Resort in Fiji. This was a result of coastal and inland deforestation, indiscriminate burning and the adoption of crops like cassava in sequential planting mainly on very steep land that accelerated erosion (Thaman et al., 2003).

2.10 MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

In the Pacific Islands, traditional management of resources in communities used to be the basis for land and marine resource use. Village communities in the Pacific have traditional ways to manage their coastal and nearshore marine resources, for example the wide use of moratoria or tabu.

In Fiji a tabu is imposed after a death of a chief to build up resources to enable a large commemorative feast after 100 days (Adams et al., c.1998) while in Solomon Islands an individual reef owner can declare this in order to build up enough trochus shell stock for occasional commercial harvest (Foale 1996 in Adams et al., c.1998).

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) programmes are currently being used in the Pacific to assist the local communities to sustain their marine resources. The coral garden project in Fiji for the Cuvu Tikina covers eight villages with the Shangri-La’s Fijian Resort. This project has an important component of educating and training local people in restoring reef and mainly setting aside 20% of the reef area as tabu to replenish fish and marine stocks (AFAP Report, 2001).

Community based giant clam reserves initiated in 1988 in Vava’u Island in Tonga increased settlement of endangered species of giant clams for surrounding reefs (UNESCAP, 2000). In association with the Tongan Ministry of Fisheries the community based giant clam reserves spread to other islands of Tonga (UNESCAP, 2000).

48

2.11 PACIFIC REGIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

There are established legislations, regulations and assistance within the Pacific region to help local communities to manage their coastal and nearshore marine resources. Government departments, regional organizations like the Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC), Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) provide management advice and carry out programmes to sustain resources (UNESCAP, 2000). Also governments, regional organizations and non-governmental organizations assist local communities in securing financial help to manage their resources.

The management of fisheries resources in the Pacific is protected under the Law of the Sea Convention 1982. The FFA assist countries to manage the highly migratory living fisheries and resources of the Pacific Islands Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), for example tuna, whales, some oceanic sharks, crayfish and turtles. The FFA is the leading agency in facilitating fishing negotiations between its 16 member countries and distant water fishing nations (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The SPC in Noumea, New Caledonia, encouraged and bolstered international cooperation to assist the local communities in the Pacific region. The SPC facilitates measures of development in providing educational, technical and scientific research to improve economic and social welfare of Pacific Islanders mainly in managing marine resources (Adams et al., c.1998). The now independent South Pacific Geosciences Commission (SOPAC, formerly CCOP-SOPAC) based in Suva, Fiji, provides technical and scientific research in aid of Pacific Islands to derive benefits by utilizing marine resources within their 200-mile EEZs (UNESCAP, 2000).

The SPREP based in Apia, Samoa focuses specifically on policy development and public education to implement conservation management of the Pacific environment (UNESCAP, 2000). All these organizations collaborate with other international organizations such as the UNESCAP, FAO and others together with Island countries and local communities as well as donors in developing sustainable means to conserve biodiversity of Islands.

49

CHAPTER THREE SAMOA: BACKGROUND, COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY AND ASSOCIATED

PROBLEMS

3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER

Chapter three consists of two main parts. First, it covers basic background information on Samoa and the current situation in relation to its environment and development. Secondly, on the basis of a review of existing literature, it discusses the effects of natural and human impacts on Samoa’s coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

3.2 LOCATION AND POLITICAL HISTORY OF INDEPENDENT SAMOA

Samoa, a volcanic archipelago in the South Pacific, lies between 13 and 15º South latitude and 168º and 173º West longitude (Whistler, 2002). In geographical terms Samoa refers to the volcanic chain of Islands that is divided politically, with the eastern Samoa Islands of Tutuila and Manu’a known as American Samoa, a territory of the United States of America (USA) and the western Islands of Independent Samoa (Figure 3.1).

Western Samoa was colonized by Germany from 1900 to 1914 and was taken over and administered by New Zealand on behalf of the League of Nations from 1914 to 1961 until it became the first colonized Island country in the Pacific to become independent in 1962 (Va’a, 2001). Its name was changed from Western Samoa to ‘Samoa’ in 1997.

The independent country of Samoa is composed of two large Islands and seven smaller ones of which four are inhabited. The two main islands are Savai’i, the largest island with an area of 1700 sq km, and the Island of Upolu with an area of 1,115 sq km (SPREP, 1994a) where the capital Apia is located and the focus of this research. The two smaller inhabited Islands of Manono and Apolima are located in the 64km wide strait between Savai’i and Upolu. The smaller uninhabited islands include Nu’utele, Nu’ulua, Nu’ulopa and Namu’a, which are all located off the southeast coast of Upolu Island (Whistler, 2002).

50

Figure 3.1: Map of the South Pacific Islands showing the location of Samoa, the research country

Source: adapted from http://www.spc.org.nc/mdgs/INDEX.htm

3.3 GEOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY

The total land area of Independent Samoa is approximately 2,820 sq. km and its topography is mainly mountainous and rugged in the interior and flat around the coast. The highest elevation in Savai’i is Mt. Silisili at 1,858 metres and Upolu’s highest elevation is Mt. Fito at 1158m (SPREP, 1994a).

The Islands of Samoa as stated by Keating (1992) were sequentially formed during the Pliocene in an easterly direction by a series of ‘hot spot’ eruptions (Whistler, 2002). According to Kear and Woods (1959) the geological structure of Samoa was formed by six distinct volcanic episodes each producing extensive lava flows that ran seaward from high volcanic cones. These volcanic episodes from oldest to the youngest (Fagaloa, Salani, Mulifanua, Lefaga, Pu’apu’a and Aopo volcanics) produced distinctive land-slopes between the volcano and the coast, and the types of

51

coastline that provides the three basic coastal types on the Islands, (Richmond 1992 in Kay, 1993). These coastal types will be explained in detail later in 3.9.

3.4 CLIMATE

Samoa has a tropical oceanic climate with the wet season from November to April and the dry season from May to October (SPREP, 1994a). Rainfall ranges from 2,500mm on the north and western leeward sides of the main islands, to over 6,000mm in the highlands of Savaii (SPREP, 1994a). About 75% of precipitation occurs during the warm/wet period particularly from November to January and cyclones usually occur in December to February (Taulealo, 1993). Predominant southeasterly trade winds in the wet season cause high rainfall in eastern Upolu whilst rainshadow areas include western Upolu and eastern and northern Savai’i (SPREP, 1994a).

It is generally hot and humid and the average annual temperature of 26.5 C is experienced by

coastal areas up to 32ºC nowadays. Humidity is usually high, with an average relative humidity of 83% in Apia (SPREP, 1994a). The wet and warm season is the most uncomfortable time due to high humidity averaging about 80% with more rainfall and greater temperatures (Whistler, 2002).

3.5 FLORA

Whistler (2002) categorized the vegetation of Samoa into six different communities:

Littoral vegetation

wetland vegetation (marshes, mangroves, freshwater swamps)

rainforest (lowland, montane and cloud forest)

upland scrub (summit scrub and montane scrub)

volcanic vegetation and

disturbed vegetation (managed land; successional; secondary forest and fernlands).

52

Samoa’s flora is composed of approximately 550 species of angiosperms/flowering plants. At the species level 30% of flowering plants in Samoa are endemic and only one single genus, Sarcopygme of the Rubiaceae family, is endemic to the Samoan archipelago (Whistler 1992, 2002). Of the 550 indigenous species there are approximately 215 ferns with 13 fern allies and about 15% of ferns in Samoa are endemic (Whistler 1984b, 2001 and 2002).

In addition about 250 non-indigenous flowering plants, which have been introduced either accidentally or intentionally, have become naturalized and are referred to as ‘weeds’ (Whistler 1988b and 2002). This research focuses on coastal and nearshore ecosystems, thus it will explain only the littoral vegetation flora of Samoa.

3.5.1 Littoral vegetation

Littoral vegetation covers the coasts and seashore along; “nearly all the undisturbed shores of Samoa, as well as on rocky offshore islets, typically from just above the high tide mark up to 5 or 10 meters elevation, but sometimes to over 100m on steep, exposed slopes” (Whistler, 2002). Nowadays, because the majority of the population has settled along the coasts, the natural vegetation has been modified and replaced by a range of introduced plants. There are mangrove communities and marshland swamps that exist at various coastal location as well as 76 recorded coastal littoral plants noted in Skelton et al. (2000).

Littoral vegetation zones and wetlands identified by Whistler (2002) are found throughout the coasts of the Samoa archipelago. There are many coastal marshes of Eleocharis consisting of the two species, the water chestnut – Eleocharis dulcis (utu’utu) and the Cyclosorus interruptus(vao tuaniu). These are found for example on the main Island of Upolu at the Apolimafou marshland on the northwest coast at Apolima-uta Village. Also, according to Whistler (2002) cyclones together with agriculture were the factors that disturbed most of the other marshes found between the coast of Apolimafou/Apolima-uta and Apia. Because of human activities such as cutting for firewood, the extent of mangrove forests today is much less than it was in the past (Whistler, 2002).

53

Mangrove swamps on coastal areas where rivers meet the sea are fundamental assets to Samoa's environment and people. Three types of mangroves (togo) are found in Samoa, the Rhizophora mangle, Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, and Xylocarpus moluccensis. The common Bruguiera on Upolu Island are found along the southern coast from Lefaga to Safata District, Falelatai on the northwest coast and at Vaiusu Bay near Apia, which was identified as the largest community (Whistler, 2002).

Common coastal strand plants include the Scaevola taccada (to’ito’i), Calophyllum inophyllum(fetau), Hibiscus tiliaceus (fau), Barringtonia asiatica (futu) and the Hernandia nymphaeifolia(pu’a) (Whistler, 2002). Littoral vines that dominate herbaceous strands on sandy shores are the beach morning glory, Ipomoea pes-capre (fue moa), beach pea, Vigna marina (fue sina),Canavalia rosea (fue fai va’a), Canavalia cathartica and the Ipomoea macrantha (Whistler, 2002).

Some other littoral tree species, which are often a single species dominates include Pisoniagrandis (pu’a vai), Erythrina variegata (gatae), Terminalia cattapa and T. samoensis (talie), Thespesia populnea (milo), Guettarda speciosa (pu’apu’a) and Cordia subcordata (tauanave)(Whistler, 2002). The Intsia bijuga (ifilele) the most valuable timber tree is unusually common at least three entirely different substrates. It occurs at some ridges between Fagamalo and northern coast at Masefau in Tutuila, American Samoa while in Savai’i it is restricted on rocky soils on areas of Pu’apu’a volcanics. The best remaining ifilele lowland forest occurs on the clay soils of Fagaloa volcanics on the ridges between Uafato and Ti’avea on Upolu. The Uafato Village harvest this slow-growing climax species commercially for handicraft (Whistler, 2002).

3.6 FAUNA

The fauna of Samoa include native species and a variety of non-indigenous species including mammals, birds, a few reptiles, a wide array of finfish and invertebrates.

Currently 13 species of mammals are found in Samoa and only 3 are native, in which two are flying foxes or fruit bats (pe’a). These are the Samoan flying fox Pteropus s.samoensis, the Tongan/White-necked flying fox, Pteropus tonganus and the insectivorous Sheath-tailed bat,

54

Emballonura semicaudata (tagiti) (MNRE, 2000a). There is a variety of introduced species that are common namely dogs, cats, horses, cattle, goats (and recently sheep) as well as rats such as the Rattus norvegicus, Rattus rattus and the Mus musculus (Taulealo, 1993).

Reptiles are limited and only one land snake, the Pacific Boa (Candola bibroni), has been recorded in Samoa (Taulealo, 1993). There are 14 species of lizards of which only one, the Samoan skink (Emoia samoensis) is endemic to the Samoan archipelago (Taulealo, 1993).

The avifauna of Samoa include 35 species of land birds of which 10 are endemic at the species or sub-species level and four were introduced (SPREP, 1994a). There are also 21 sea birds, recorded or migratory species. (MNRE, 2000a).

Dahl (1986) listed 14 birds as either ‘rare’ or ‘endangered’ (SPREP, 1994a). These include the tooth-billed pigeon, Didunculus strigirostris (manumea); the Gynnomyza samoensis (maomao);Samoan ground dove, Galliclumba stairii (tuaimeo); Island thrush, Turdus poliocephalussamoensis (t t malili); white-browed crake, Poliolimna cinereus (vai); Samoan white-eye, Zosterops samoensis (mata pa’epa’e); and the sooty rail, Porzara tabnensis (Taulealo, 1993). Also the native Samoan wood hen, Pareudiastes pacificus (puna’e) last recorded in 1905 has been assumed to be extinct though a population may still persist on upland Savaii. The Samoan stormpetrel (tai ) was also recently recorded as a single specimen (Taulealo, 1993). Four species were introduced and the common myna, Acridontheres trisis that was introduced in the 1960s has spread rapidly through cultivated areas of Upolu (Taulealo, 1993).

There is also a diversity of terrestrial invertebrates, many of which have not been inventoried. Dahl (1986) recorded 21 butterflies, of which only 2 are endemic to the Samoan archipelago, a swallowtail, Papiliio godeffroy and Hypolimnas thompsoni (Taulealo, 1993).

There are 19 endemic species of land snail found within the Samoan archipelago. The newly established African snail, Achatina fulica, poses a great danger to the existence of endemicspecies. Wilson and Taylor (1967) produced a list of 59 ant species in Samoa, of which 12 are

55

endemic (MNRE, 2000a). The survival and existence of terrestrial fauna is threatened by the increasing demand and pressure on land and forests (Taulealo, 1993).

3.7 MARINE ENVIRONMENT

Zann (1991) stated that the coral reef fauna of Samoa is mainly Indo-western Pacific in origin but impoverished compared to other western Pacific Islands due to its far eastern isolation. The relative poverty of species is partly due to the islands’ origin as they consists of steep sided volcanic cones that are set deep in waters and recent lava flows that covered previous reef areas (Taulealo, 1993).

Similarly, Zann and Mulipola (1995) pointed out that due to volcanic origins, Western Samoa has only a small area of coral reefs and island shelf. Fringing and barrier reefs exist with very shallow lagoons. For example on Upolu Island, reef length is about 271 km with reef area (to 40 meters depth) of about 470 km² (Zann and Mulipola, 1995).

The recorded marine fish fauna in the whole Samoan archipelago identified by Wass (1984) shows 991 species with 890 that inhabit shallow waters/reefs, 56 in deeper waters and 45 pelagic species (MNRE, 2000a). There are 2 species of sea turtles: the green turtle, Chelonia mydas(fonu/laumei) and the hawksbill, Ereimochelys inbricata (laumei) are found in Samoa. A small number of hawksbill breeds on the small-uninhabited Islands off the southeast of Upolu Island and a few beaches in Savaii (Taulealo, 1993).

Seaweeds and other marine organisms are vital for local consumption and as an income source for some people. Bell and Mulipola (1995) stated that there are 3 edible algae (limu) from Samoa, Caulerpa racemosa, Caulerpa sp., and the Halymenia durvillei (Skelton et al., 2000). Skelton and South (1999) recorded algae from both western and eastern Islands of Samoa and listed 198 taxa, which represents about 50-60 of the potential algal flora from Samoa (Skelton etal., 2000).

56

Preliminary results of a survey by Skelton at the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve recorded a total of 297 species of algae, 89 of which are new records for Samoa (Skelton et al., 2000). South and Skelton (1999; 2000) indicated that 4 red algae from Palolo Deep are recognized as new to science, including the Amansia paloloensis, Ceramium upoluense, Ceramium kramerii and the Ceramium rintelsianum, which could be present in other neighbouring Islands, (Skelton et al.,2000). Hartog (1970) recorded 2 seagrass species from Samoa and these are the Halophilaovalis and the Syringodium isoetifolium. Seagrass beds are uncommon in Samoa and the best community is probably found around Manono Island (Skelton et al., 2000).

The other commonly found species important for consumption are the sea cucumbers, Holothuriaatra and Stichopus chloronatus as well as sea urchins. Giant clams, crabs, lobsters, octopus and many shellfish collected by women and children accounted for much of household consumption.

3.7.1 Fisheries

Subsistence fishing is the largest and most important fishing activity in Samoa. Zann (1991) recorded that almost half of all rural households on Upolu go fishing at least once a week and estimated that 33% of households fish for subsistence.

FAO (2002) listed that the most important coastal resources in Samoa in the order of importance are finfish (especially surgeonfish, grouper, mullet, carangids, rabbit fish); octopus, giant clams, bêche-de-mer, turbo snail and crab. Samoilys and Carlos (1990) identified main fisheries in Samoa:

i. coastal fisheries for domestic consumption: fishing carried out byvillagers in small scale and commercial sectors using net, spear, hook, line and hand collection;

ii. coastal fisheries for export: limited range of marine species like sea cucumbers, mainly carried out by local companies, usually in low volume;

iii. oceanic fisheries: tropical tuna fishing carried out by local and distant water fishing long-line vessels within the EEZs of the country’s high seas (UNESCAP, 2003a).

57

Zann (1991) identified coastal and nearshore areas like the shore, lagoon and reefs (Figure 3.2) as the main fishing grounds, which were the focus of fishing activities in villages throughout Samoa.

Figure 3.2: Fishing areas

Source: Samoily and Carlos (1990) in UNESCAP, 2003a

3.7.2 Finfishes

The use of fish catches by households (Figure 3.3) shows that most of the catch is for consumption with the surplus been sold. This practice of selling the catch is most common with fishers living near the town, while rural fishers sell a limited portion within their own village with most of the catch being reserved for local consumption and distributing/sharing with their relatives.

Figure 3.3: Fish uses

Source: Samoily and Carlos (1990) in UNESCAP 2003a

58

Studies show that fish and other marine species provide the main source of protein for the diet ofSamoan people, especially those in the rural villages. Hosch (2000) noted that about 50 to 75% of dietary proteins come from marine foodstuffs (FAO, 2000). Zann (1991) stated that fresh fish is eaten on average of about 2.6 days/week in rural and 1.8 days/week in urban households. He estimated annual average fish consumption for rural households amounted to 360 kg/capita, and 200 kg/capita in urban areas. King’s (1990) estimated subsistence catch of about 4,600 tonnes is about four times greater than the fish sold commercially for local consumption (UNESCAP, 2003a).

In shallow waters the main fish caught include the reefal species of surgeonfish (acanthurids),parrotfish (scarids), soldierfish (holocentrids), wrasses (labrids) and the lagoon species like mullet (mugulids), goatfish (mullids) and trevallies (carangids) (Zann, 1991).

3.7.3 Commercial Contribution and Important Marine Species

Artisanal fishery is quite an important source of income and food not only in rural and urban Samoan but other Pacific communities.

The introduction of catamaran fishing boats (alia) in Samoa has increased commercial fishing in the country not only for sales at the local fish market but also for exports. The estimated total volume of inshore fishery products or seafood landed from July 2002 to June 2003 was about 7000 metric tonnes (mt), and 94% of this landing was harvested through subsistence fishing. The total value of the export volume from this is about 29 mt valued WST$0.25 million (Fisheries Division, 2003).

Through domestic outlets in Samoa, the total volume and value of inshore fishery products amounted to approximately 435 mt valued around WST$4.3 million and the exported volume of this was about 29 mt with a value of WST$0.25 million (Fisheries Division, 2003).

The reef and lagoon finfishes contributed approximately 65% to the domestic market within 1998/1999 in total volume. The main species landed include the parrotfish (fuga) 24.8%,

59

unicornfish (ume) 17.6%, emperors (mata’ele’ele) 11.8%, surgeonfish (alogo, pone) 11.4%, mullet (anae) 10.9% and a few in other species (Skelton et al., 2000).

The main crustaceans sold in the domestic market are the Panulirus lobsters and mangrove crab (Scylla serrata), which accounted for 58% and 35% of the estimated total landings, (Skelton etal., 2000). Giant clams constitute the highest percentage of bivalves landed and sold with 51% followed by the cockle (tugane) with 48%. Other target species included a variety of species of sea cucumbers and octopus (Skelton et al., 2000).

The aquarium trade exists in Samoa and the main fish species exported are Pomacentrus andChrysiptera spp., Labroides spp., Amphiprion spp., and Paracirrhitus spp. (Skelton et al., 2000). In 1993/1994 about 65,527 fishes were exported and figures in 1994/1995 amounted to 30,405 fishes, mainly of assorted damsels, wrasses and angelfish (Skelton et al., 2000). In the early 1990s Samoa earned about WS$47,704 (US$19,635) from tropical fish exports (UNESCAP, 2003a). Live corals have also been commercially exported to overseas aquariums.

3.7.4 Corals and Reefs

As stressed before, reefs and lagoons of Samoa are limited in size. The leeward reefs on the north and west of the main island (Upolu) are relatively wide while windward reefs in the east and south coasts are narrower. Reefs that surround both Islands of Savai’i and Upolu are fairly close to shore and the enclosed lagoons are generally shallow (van Pel, 1960).

Corals of the windward side are well developed and the lagoonal circulation is good with a short water residence time (Zann, 1991). The best-developed reefs of about 90sq km are off the northwest from Apia to Manono on Upolu Island and the 35sq km off northeast Savai’i from Salelologa to Pu’apu’a (Zann, 1991). The major coral types include the branching Poritescylindrica, massive P.cf.lutea, Acropora spp., and Millepora (Zann, 1991).

A preliminary survey conducted in 1991 indicated that the dominant genera of corals at the surveyed sites included the Acropora, Montipora and Pocillopora (Samoilys and Carlos, 1990 in

60

UNESCAP, 2003a). Live coral cover is high in Savai’i (50%), where it is mostly Acroporacompared with only 22% live coral on Upolu (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1: Coral cover for Upolu and Savai’i Islands

Island Hard live coral Dead coral Other Acropora spp. Other corals

Savai’i 16.6% 38.2% 35.0% 10.2% Upolu 7.5% 14.0% 14.0% 64.5% Source: Sulu et al., 2002

Table 3.1 shows high live coral percentage in Savai’i than Upolu. The reason that there is less dead coral cover or rubble in Savai’i could be that the reefs there are under less pressure compared to the densely populated Island of Upolu.

Green (1996) surveyed 7 sites on Upolu Island, finding that despite cyclones and other impacts on reefs, the reef fronts of surveyed areas were in reasonably good condition with healthy coral and fish assemblages and dense stands of plate corals at the sites. The reefs at Fagaloa where effluents of a hydro dam empty, as well as those at Vaitele, the industrial area, were also described as being exceptionally good in condition with lush coral communities and abundant fish diversity (Green, 1996). However the sites were outside the lagoons which are susceptible more to terrestrial pollution.

3.8 LAND AND MARINE TENURE

The traditional ownership and management of land and sea in Samoa is based on its hierarchical chiefly system hierarchy. About 81% of land in Samoa is labelled as customary land, although the trend toward individual ownership of these lands is increasing (SPREP, 1994a).

Customary lands are communally owned and allocated for usage in particular villages under their chiefly structure. Land ownership is determined by a combination of awarded titles and genealogy and is under the trusteeship of the chiefs (matai) (Taulealo, 1993).

61

The sea area, from the coast to the reef is for fishing and is also under the ownership and management of each village but also more widely used by people within a district unless a village imposes a taboo on their fishing grounds from neighbouring villages or outsiders. Subsistence and artisanal fishing are mostly done in nearshore areas and lagoon (Taulealo, 1993).

The open sea beyond the reef is difficult to control and is openly used particularly for commercial fishers who use catamaran motorboats (alia). The vast ocean under the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (Figure 3.4) of Samoa is controlled and managed by the Government of Samoa with the assistance from regional organizations like the SPC and FFA (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The exclusive economic sea area shows that Independent Samoa is surrounded by bordering American Samoa (east), Tokelau and Tuvalu (north), Fiji (west) and Tonga (south), making Samoa a country with a land area of 2,935 km², the country with the smallest 200 nautical-mile EEZ in the Pacific (Figure 3.4).

Figure 3.4: Map showing Exclusive Economic Zone of Pacific and Samoa

Source: adapted from King (1991)

62

The country’s EEZ sea area covers only 120,000km², which is quite small in terms of development of the offshore pelagic commercial fishing and in comparison to the EEZ of other large or smaller Pacific Island countries in terms of population and land area (King, 1991). For example, Kiribati has a land area of 690 km² and a population of 64,000 with an EEZ of 3,550,000 km² and American Samoa has 197 km² and population of 36,000 with 390,000 km² EEZ area (King, 1991). As a result, Samoa has a disproportionately high dependence on its nearshore fisheries resources, the focus of this thesis.

3.9 COASTS, SHORELINES AND BEACHES

Coasts, shorelines and beaches are essential in Samoa as in other Pacific Islands, for settlement and providing a basis for sustainable livelihoods. The coastline of the country is around 437km consisting of about 211 km in Savai’i while Upolu together with neighbouring smaller islands accounts for some 226 km (Zann, 1999). Recent volcanic activities experienced in Savaii in the early 1900s caused lava flows that stretched outwards and covered the coasts of Sale’aula and Samalae’ulu Villages at the central north of Savai’i Island.

The Island of Upolu has coral reefs and lagoons extending some 220 km and Savai’i has only 57 km in area (Zann, 1999). Reefs nearly encircle the whole island of Upolu and Richmond (1991) stated that fringing reefs are the most common with barrier and patch reefs in scattered areas. Fringing and patch reefs are normally found on Upolu Island where barrier reefs are shallow (Richmond, 1991).

Beaches occur as semi-continuous stretches of coast bounded by rock headlands, and pocket beaches are common on Upolu Island (Richmond, 1991). The largest continuous beach on Upolu is fronting the Vaie’e Peninsula barrier spit on southern Upolu (Richmond, 1991).

Kear and Wood (1959) categorized the coasts of Upolu Island in three subdivisions based on reef characteristics, depositional features and inshore geology. These divisions are further subdivided into various types (Figure 3.5).

63

64

Kear and Woods (1959) describe Type I as consisting of wide fringing reef transitional to a shallow barrier reef where coastal deposits are poorly developed. Type II refers to cliffed coasts with little or no reef development and limited or no depositional features (Richmond, 1991). Type III include coasts that occur either as fringing reef and narrow coastal strip mostly of storm derived sand beach ridges (Richmond, 1991). Type III has beaches, barrier spits, and coastal swamps associated with rivers and streams. Also Type III coastlines are fronted by slightly wider fringing reef but with prominent gaps where occurrence of freshwater output is high (Richmond, 1991).

3.10 DEMOGRAPHY

The 2001 census showed that the population of Independent Samoa is just under 180,000 (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2: Total population of Samoa from 1976 – 2001

1976 1981 1986 1991 2001150,983 156,341 157,156 161,298 176,710

Source: Department of Statistics (1993)

The 2001 census indicated that the total population had reached 176,710 with 92,050 (52%) males and 84,660 (48%) females (Statistical Services, 2001). This reflects a 10% increase from the rise of about 15,412 people within 10 years from the total population of 161,298 in 1991.

The younger age group still dominates the total population, with about 71,978 people below age 15 in 2001, which accounted for 41% of the total population (Statistical Services, 2001). This indicates that increasing population in the future will place greater pressures on the limited coastal and nearshore resources of Samoa.

3.11 ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

The economy of Samoa is dominated by subsistence agriculture and related activities that support about 75% of the population, especially those in rural areas (Taulealo, 1993). The Asian

65

Development Bank (2000) also noted that the majority of the workforce is employed in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. There is a limited range of exports, mainly agricultural crops, marine resources and a little in manufacturing. Export contributions to the economy include fish, mainly tuna, and to a lesser extent taro, copra and recently kava and the nonu fruits (Morindacitrifolia) being sold for production of the noni juice for medicinal purposes.

Some manufacturing contributes to the economy of the country. These include the Vailima Brewery and the Yazaki Company that employs more than 500 workers, predominantly females, in producing motor vehicle wires for export overseas. From 1985 to 1989 the manufacturing share in the real GDP remained at about 12% (Asian Development Bank, 2000).

The macroeconomic performance of Samoa has grown strongly within the last decade, with strong input from fisheries export. The increase of 3.1% growth in 1998 showed a 27% growth in fishing (Asian Development Bank, 2000). Annual fishing production for Samoa in the late 1990s as recorded by Gillet and Lightfoot (2002) shows that subsistence fishing contributed about 4,293 mt with a value of USD$ 7,143 and coastal commercial fishing provided about 3,086 mt with a value of USD$ 6,583.

In 1985 to 1989 economic growth was 2.5%, which reflected economic reforms in the mid–1980s and the contribution of strong tourist receipts and remittances (Asian Development Bank, 2000). Tourism is now a very significant industry in the country as in the early 1980s tourism grew from 5% to 10 – 15% of the GDP (Asian Development Bank, 2000).

The tropical cyclones Ofa and Val that affected Samoa in 1990 and 1991 were a setback to the economy, and in addition the country was hit by the taro blight fungus in the early 1990s that devastated the taro commodity that at the time was the backbone of Samoa’s agricultural exports. However, McGregor (1999) stated that after the disastrous cyclones that damaged crops and property, the economy of Samoa recovered rapidly with the real GDP that grew from 6.7% in 1996 (UNDP, 1999). The GDP weakened in 1997 to a growth of 1.7% but recovered to 3.1% in 1998 and currently reflect a sustained growth of 3-4%, (Samoa Treasury Department,

66

2002). Agricultural exports have weakened and tourism and remittances have become significant in the economy of Samoa.

Remittances from overseas Samoans to their relatives at home were the major source of external income (Asian Development Bank, 2000). In 1992 net private transfers into Samoa contributed 29% to the country’s GDP while 31% was from exports of goods and services (Pacific Economic Bulletin, 1994 in Brown and Walker, 1995). This shows the significant of remittances and in 2002 remittances earned about $188.06 million tala and it increased to $189.37 million tala in 2003 (CBS, 2004).

3.12 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE BIODIVERSITY

Destructions of coastal and marine resources is caused by pressures from high population, desperate activities due low standard of living, commercial fishing and many other factors leading to decline in resources. Zann and Mulipola (1995) reported that the status of fish stocks in Samoa had declined in the past 10 years according to almost 80% of the interviewed fishers.

Other developments like agriculture, logging, construction and infrastructure have contributed to erosion, pollution and sedimentation. Furthermore, there is pressure from natural catastrophes such as tropical cyclones, global warming and associated sea level rise and climate changes that cause problems like coral bleaching and coastal erosion.

3.12.1 Natural Events

No other cyclone in the history of Samoa have had the destructive impact inflicted on land and marine resources as compared to the effects of cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991.

Cyclone Ofa in February 1990 stripped the upper portion of outer reefs of living coral and covered the lagoons and reef flats with fragmented coral debris (UNESCAP, 2003a). These coral fragments covered and smashed the lagoon corals and completely eliminated the lagoon fauna on exposed reefs. As a result the most destroyed reefs were those along the western and

67

northern coast on the Islands, especially Upolu. Cyclone Val that followed in December 1991 intensified and compounded the damage caused by Ofa earlier (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The cyclones Ofa 1990 and Val 1991 altered the physical nature of the Palolo Deep Marine Reserve and its adjacent reef area (Lovell and Toloa, 1994). The massive waves during the cyclones removed the existing coral reef and scoured the reef front down to bare rock with a large portion of it finding its way onto the reef crest as rubble banks. As a result much of this material was deposited in Palolo Deep forming rubble slopes on the northern and western sides (Lovell and Toloa, 1994).

On the coast east of Apia reef slope corals were destroyed by cyclone Ofa. Cyclone banks of about 30 to 50 metres wide, 2.5 metres high and 1 km in length nearly covers the full length of the exposed reef (Zann, 1991). At Fagaloa Bay the fringing reefs were well developed around the edge of the Bay but cyclone Ofa caused severe damage there, especially in the eastern shore (Zann, 1991). Destruction by cyclone Ofa was estimated at about $300 million in damage and this exacerbated in 1991 by cyclone Val, which cost at least $600 million in damage (SPREP, 1994a).

Other recent cyclones that have caused significant destruction to Samoa include cyclones Heta in January 2004 and Olaf in February 2005. Both caused damages to property and the terrestrial and marine environments.

3.12.2 Coastal Deforestation and Reclamation

It was estimated that 20% of nursery grounds for nearshore marine species including finfish, some bivalves and crustaceans have been lost to reclamation activities (Zann in Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Mangrove communities throughout Samoa suffer due to reclamation. For example, two-thirds of the coastline between Apia and Faleolo airport on the northwest coast of Upolu Island has been incrementally reclaimed (SOPAC, 2003). Much of the area around Apia town in Upolu used to be

68

covered with vast mangroves, such as the Fugalei area where the agricultural domestic market is now located, as well as shops and other businesses.

One of the best Rhizophora mangrove scrubs in Samoa was along the northeast coast of Upolu at Taumeasina Peninsula in the village of Moata’a near Apia. However, this large mangrove area has been reclaimed for a proposed tourist resort as well as a road. In 1970, it was estimated that the mangrove area was about 9.1 hectares and by 1990 only 5.0 hectares of mangroves remained (Suluvae in Environment Forum, 2000b). Currently this same site has now been sold to a different overseas business with similar developments in planning stage.

The drainage pattern of the tidal channel at this mangrove area has been completely changed: the channel widened while the mangrove fringe narrowed in 1990 compared to 1970. About half of the mangroves have been lost as well as the depletion of other marine organisms (Suluvae in Environment Forum, 2000b).

3.12.3 Sedimentation and other Stream Link Problems to Nearshore Ecosystems

The rivers and streams transport terrestrial materials, rubbish and sediments from upstream land areas to the shores and coastal areas. The Vaisigano River in Apia for example, was reported as being turbid and carried a large amount of silt into the Apia harbour during heavy rains. FAO (1993) reported that watersheds are steep and rivers wash silt directly onto adjacent reefs in the vicinity of Apia (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Rivers cause sedimentation on the coasts and can inhibit coral growth. Studies in 1975 and 1981 showed that the seabed in the central and eastern parts of the Apia harbour swallowed up to five feet in the six year period due to heavy sedimentation from upstream (Gauss in Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Dumping of wastes along the coasts and in rivers all ended up in the sea, thus causing coral stress and destruction. The reef adjacent Letogo Stream near Vailele Village on the east of Apia experienced sedimentation (Zann, 1991). The inner lagoon of Fagaloa Bay is strongly terrestrial influenced and fringing reefs there have a low live coral cover (Zann, 1991).

69

3.12.4 Waste Disposal and Pollution

In previous years the dumping site within the Apia urban area was the mangrove community at Vaitoloa, Vaiusu Bay, before it shifted to its current location at Tafaigata, inland from Apia. It was estimated that about 17,000 cubic metres of solid wastes used to be dumped at the old Vaitoloa site annually (SPREP, 1994a). There is evidence that in the low-lying areas of Apia, ground water is being polluted by effluent from many of the sewage disposal facilities (SPREP, 1994a).

The area at Vaitele in Upolu and surrounding areas like the Vaiusu Bay and Mulinuu lagoon face waste problems from industrial effluents pumping straight from factories like the Vailima Brewery, beef cannery, copra mill and other industries. Also waste and thermal water as well as polluted effluents drained to the coasts contribute to eutrophication and poisoning of marine organisms (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Sewage is a contributing factor to eutrophication. For example, an open drain used to discharge sewage effluent from the Tusitala hotel in Apia into the tidal area of the Fugalei stream. This contained high concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus and faecal coliform bacteria (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Effluents from the brewery factory at Vaitele area also contained high concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus that ended up at the coast. The high content of phosphorus caused algal growth in undesirable amounts (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

The very high faecal coliform concentrations in stream flows, especially the Fugalei stream indicate the contamination of Vaiusu Bay and cause contamination of shellfish like the Gafraruimsp. (tugane), which threatens human health. As well, the loss of the sea slug Dolabellaauricularia (gau), may be caused by the poor water quality of the area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

Poisons, chemicals and land-based wastes washed down by rivers can result in smothering and killing of coral reefs. Widespread use of pesticides or herbicides such as the commonly used Paraquat or Gramoxone, especially upstream near water catchment areas, can leach into rivers. Consequently, these poisons can end up at sea killing fish and other marine organisms like

70

bivalves that accumulate high body levels of pesticides from waters that contain a low concentration (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

3.12.5 Dredging and Sand Mining

Small-scale mining is practised in Samoa by families and villages for construction and beautification of villages. Sand is useful in many developments like housing, reclamation, cement production and other uses. Commercial large-scale sand mining operations caused environmental problems in the 1980s. Carter's study in 1991 recorded that between 1970 and 1983 sand and gravel were mined to a depth of about eight metres within a few metres of the shoreline (SOPAC and SPREP, 1994).

The commercial sand mining operation at Mulinu’u in Apia is still in process and supply for activities like land reclamation, road building and construction. Consequently, the lagoon at this area has now been deepened and the habitat of many marine organisms of the area has been destroyed. For example, Bell (1985) stated that dredging is suspected of causing the disappearance of the sea hare, Dolabella auricularia (gau) from Mulinu’u area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991). This problem exacerbated because of the presence of the rubble seawall at the time.

When the Apia harbour was built in 1964, major dredging and construction took place for land reclamation resulting in sand erosion due to the then poorly constructed seawall. This resulted in huge boulders and rocks replacing the beaches along Apia coast (Carter 1991 in Solomon 1994). As a result of material dredged from the harbor the fringing reef in Apia harbour has been almost entirely reclaimed.

3.12.6 Infra-structural Development and Impacts

Activities like road and resort construction, farming, logging and deforestation increase sediment loading into rivers, for example the streams and rivers that wash down silt directly onto adjacent reefs in the Apia area (Klinckhamers, 1992).

71

There are business developments along the rural coasts of Upolu and Savai’i but their impacts are not so severe compared to the urban areas. In Apia about 75% of the shoreline has been replaced by seawalls that were constructed after cyclones Ofa 1990 and Val in 1991. Also about 12 ha of the shore had been reclaimed from the lagoon for buildings and the harbor (Zann, 1991).

Beach erosion has occurred due to coastal alterations, for example beach erosion at Mulinu’u Peninsula as a result of seawall construction. The seawall also along the east coast road of Fagali’i Village on the east of Apia was swept off by strong waves during cyclone Ofa (Zann, 1991).

Unplanned seawalls alter the equilibrium of beach ecosystems when waves and currents do not follow the normal pattern of reaching the shoreline. They cause the erosion of sand when the currents hit the straight seawall and wash off the sand when they recede. Andrew and Holthus (1988) recorded that fishers from Aleipata village at the eastern end of Upolu Island claimed that coastal erosion had become a severe problem there. This was seen by the width of the beach and foreshore that eroded from 20 to 50 metres due to the change in wave patterns and inshore currents caused by the docking area constructed at the area (Fellow and Taylor, 1991).

The Afulilo hydroelectric dam (Figure 4.6) on Upolu Island at Ta’elefaga Village in Fagaloa District degraded particularly the marine environment of Fagaloa Bay. Surface drainage into the Dam surpassed expectations and caused overflows. The generators that operate the dam are located at Taelefaga Village and the people there experience noise pollution. The velocity of the stream that goes through the village has increased with additional water being discharged from the powerhouse. The nutrient level of sediment increases and it turns the flowing stream water smelly and discolored (Onorio and Tamata, 1997).

The above study stated that the Afulilo Dam has caused the disappearance of some marine species from Fagaloa Bay. The scad mackerel, Selar crumenophthalmus (atule), a seasonal finfish, and a number of shellfishes and other invertebrates, such as seahares and urchins that are no longer found (Onorio and Tamata, 1997) (Table 3.3).

72

Table 3.3: Marine organisms now absent from Fagaloa Bay

SAMOAN NAME ENGLISH NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Atule Purse eye scad Selar crumenophthalmusAlili Turban shell Turbo chrysostomus and T.setosusTugane Venus shell Gafrarium tumiidumFole Pen shell Pinna sp.Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auriculariaFatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus sp.Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaeiSOURCE: adapted from Onorio and Tamata (1997)

It was believed that the disappearance of these species may have been caused by over-fishing but large numbers of dead juvenile shellfish in the Bay suggest that the problem is mainly due to the changes in the discharge of Taelefaga Stream. Also sedimentation increase was due to the establishment of the power station and the Afulilo Dam (Onorio and Tamata, 1997).

3.13 OVER-HARVESTING AND EXPLOITATION OF MARINE SPECIES

The increasing subsistence and commercial importance of many marine resources together with low standard of living, increasingly leads to the over-exploitation of many resources.

The giant clam species (Hippopus hippopus) is the only known marine species being extinct from waters of Samoa. However, many fish and other marine species have significantly declined as a result of over-harvesting and destructive fishing.

Zann (1991) explained some possible reasons for the decline of inshore fish stocks:

over-fishing due to increasing demand

use of effective and modern but not selective fishing techniques

use of destructive techniques such as poisons and dynamite, and

the loss of fish habitat through reclamation, coral sand mining and surface runoff.

Zann (1991) stated that due to over-fishing inshore reefs and coral reef habitats had been severely stressed. The problem of selling of undersized lobsters, crabs and finfishes and other marine organisms has been witnessed at the fish market in Apia town. This is a problem because monitoring and enforcement of regulations relating to marine species are very weak.

73

On Upolu, Samoilys and Carlos (1990) categorize over-fishing of fish stocks on some reefs and habitats in two types:

I. Growth over-fishing: This is shown by undersized reef species selling at local market, including wide range of finfishes, crabs, lobsters and clams;

II. Stock over-fishing: Some fish species and invertebrates were so heavily fished that they became locally endangered. These include the giant clams (Tridacnasquamosa, and T. maxima) that are now rare in many locations (UNESCAP, 2003a).

Alternatively, the declines in landings of some species can probably also be attributed to reduction of fishing in some rural households due to the improved economic situation of many subsistence households and the availability of cheap imported frozen meat foods (Zann, 1991).

Preliminary surveys by Samoilys and Carlos in 1990 of selected reef fish species and habitats at particular reef sites around Upolu Island show that hard substrate (consisting of dead coral and rock with less coverage of live hard and soft corals) dominated all upper reef slopes and lagoons being surveyed (UNESCAP, 2003a). It was seen at the surveyed areas that the higher the cover of hard substrate, the greater the increase in fish abundance and biomass. However, this relationship was stronger on the outer reef slopes. They concluded that biomasses were lowest and mean sizes of individuals were smallest in the heavily fished inshore lagoons. The deeper and outer reef slopes have the highest biomasses and large sizes of selected species; and finally, that highest biomass and sizes were found on reef slopes at the least fished sites (UNESCAP, 2003a).

The sizes of finfishes have decreased due to over-harvesting of the common species. For example Mulipola (1997) recorded that the sizes fell for the majority of surgeonfishes – Acanthuridae lineatus, Ctenochaetus striatus and Naso spp. within the 16–20 cm length interval (Mulipola, 2002). Most parrotfishes and wrasses caught (about 61%) were between 16cm to 30cm. About 70% of emperors caught were within 16-20 cm length with trevallies between 16cm and 30cm. Much of the recorded harvested catch was below the minimum legal sizes under the Fisheries Regulations of 1995 (Mulipola, 2002).

74

Decline in some taxa has been shown by the decrease in landings at the fish market of the big eye scads, Selar crumenopthalmus (atule) from 12.5 to 0.5 metric tonne (mt) between 1986 and 1987; giant clams Tridacna spp (faisua) from 10 to 0.1 mt; trevallies, Carangidae (malauli) from 20 to 1 mt; mullet, Mugulidae (anae) from 27 to 2.5 mt; coral cods, serranids (gatala) from 12 to 0.6 mt and parrotfish, scarids (fuga) from 27 to 4.9 mt (Mulipola, 2002).

Shellfishes that had been over-harvested included the top shell, Tectis pyramis (ali’ao) and turban snails, Turbo chrysostomus and T. setosus (alili) that has been depleted or become rare in some areas due to over-fishing (Zann, 1991). On the northwest of Upolu Island fishers reported that some gastropods like the sea hare, Dolabella (gau) and the edible sipunculid worm, Siponosoma (ipo) have virtually disappeared with similar declines in species like the jellyfish Cassiopea (alu’alu) and the sea cucumber Stichopus horridus gonads (sea). Even the paloloworm Eunice viridis was reported to have vanished from this area (Zann, 1991).

The two existing species of clams, the Tridacna squamosa and Tridacna maximum, were heavilyfished and severely depleted in most areas with the species Hippopus hippopus having become extinct (Taulealo, 1993). The crown-of-thorns starfish predator, the giant triton, Charonia tritoniawas dramatically reduced as a result of over-fishing for the ornamental trade (Skelton et al.,2000).

Five companies in Samoa began harvesting and exporting bêche-de-mer to Chinese markets in late 1992 and by 1995 this stock has declined greatly (UNESCAP, 2003a). Bell (1996) noted that data from the Fisheries Division showed export of sea cucumbers/bêche-de-mer by species composition, weight and valued indicated a decline in several species due to over-fishing, and the department in 1995 set up a certification of fishery products for exports (UNESCAP, 2003a).

3.13.1 Fishing Methods

Apart from cyclones, pollution and developments, changes in fishing techniques have contributed to the decline of marine resources. Zann (1991b) recorded that the main fishing techniques widely used in Samoa include spear fishing (50%), nets (31%), hook and line (16%) and gleaning or collecting (3.6%).

75

With increasing importance of fish commercially and increasing local demand for fresh fish and seafoods, illegal and destructive methods have been used by some fishers. Illegal fishing practices used by people include dynamite fishing, chemicals like bleaches and toxic plants. For example, the commonly used plant, the Derris elliptica vine and the nut of the Barringtoniaasiatica (King, 1995).

Efficient methods also increase catches nowadays, for example the use of torches by diving/spearing fishers at night as well as cast and gill nets that take various sizes of fish.

3.13.2 Threats to Corals and Reefs

Human impacts that affect coral reefs in Samoa include river sedimentation; rubbish and waste disposal such as sewage and domestic wastes; industrial wastes; population increase and settlement; sand mining; agriculture; tourism; over-fishing; fishing methods and in addition, natural events particularly tropical cyclones.

Even though Green (1996) recorded healthy corals at the surveyed sites, this was a reflection of the reef fronts only; the lagoonal sites were severely affected, indicating an immediate threat compared with the front reef sites. Dead corals and structural damage at some reef site lagoons show that lagoons are being damaged, which could be caused by dynamite or crown-of-thorns starfish (Green, 1996).

Pesticides have been suggested as a contributing factor to the outbreak of the coral predator the crown-of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci (alamea). Zann (1991) stated that the serious effect and severe damage on reef ecosystems caused by tropical cyclones and outbreaks of the crown- of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci, contributed to the destruction of large areas of reefs on Upolu Island within the last twenty years.

The first recorded outbreak of the crown-of-thorns starfish in Samoa was in 1969 on the south coast of Upolu Island. Between 1978 and 1985 large outbreaks at other areas in Upolu occurred whilst Savai’i Island experienced large outbreaks from 1980 to 1987, (UNESCAP, 2003a). The government and villagers tried to control the problem and as a result the southern and eastern reefs of the country recovered quickly.

76

The northern and western reefs were subjected to greatest stress due to fishing activities and pollution, thus causing severe damage to living corals (UNESCAP, 2003a).

3.14 MANAGEMENT AND LEGISLATIONS

The Councils of Chiefs (fono) in Samoa are the traditional sole authority in villages entrusted with managing of farmland, forests and nearshore marine resources. The community based Samoa Fishing Project started in 1995 as the Fishing Extension by the Government of Samoa under the Fisheries Department with financial aid from Australia resulted in many villages setting up their marine reserves (Ropeti, 2004). This includes the nursing of giant clams and conservation of coral areas and by doing this the villages set up their own by-laws and regulations to manage their reserves. Faasili and Taua (2001) recorded the success rate of this village management programme (Table 3.4) based on six-monthly reviews.

Table 3.4: Summary of the six-monthly review of villages carried out in December 2000

Degree of success Upolu Savai’i Total Achievement 85% and over 14 11 25 4250-84% 22 10 32 53Less 50% 3 32 3 5Total 39 21 60 100Source: Faasili and Taua (2001)

The table 3.3 illustrates that 42% of the villages under the Samoa Fishing Project are doing very well, with 52% doing reasonably well and 5% that are not performing. By 2004 a total of 76 villages were under the programme with 48 from Upolu and Manono and 28 from Savai’i (Ropeti, 2004).

The government of Samoa have in place some legislation and laws that protect natural resources. The Fisheries Act 1988 provide regulations and laws regarding the use and management of marine resources (Peteru, 1993). The National Parks and Reserves Act 1974 contain legislations for Marine Parks and Reserves and so does the Lands, Surveys and Environment Act 1989, which manages and protects natural resources and environment (Peteru, 1993). Eventhough these legislations and by-laws exist they need to be enforced in order to achieve their purposes and conserve resources.

77

CHAPTER FOUR STUDY VILLAGES AND COASTAL BIODIVERSITY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Chapter 4 provides background information on the four case study villages on the Island ofUpolu. These include three from the northeast coast – Vailele near Apia and Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga at Fagaloa – and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga on the southwest coast on the Island of Upolu (Figure 4.1).

The first part (4.2 – 4.5) provides background information on the population, social structure, and sources of income as well as the physical environment of the study villages. The second part (4.6 – 4.8) presents the results of the field survey on the range, frequency and status of coastal and nearshore biodiversity.

4.2 POPULATION AND SETTLEMENT

The census of Samoa in 2001 shows the total population in the four study villages (Table 4.1).

Table 4.1: Population of the Study Villages as of 2001

Villages Male Female Total % to district Av. # H/hold Vailele 1,650 1,525 3,175 45.42 7Ma’asina 89 70 159 9.54 8Ta’elefaga 89 93 182 10.92 7Gagaifolevao 269 263 532 14.33 7

Source: adapted from Statistical Services, 2001.

Table 4.1 shows the high population of Vailele compared to the rural villages of Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Gagaifolevao. Vailele contains 45% of Vaimauga east population, making it the most populous of the four villages of its district, largely as a result of internal migration in which many people relocate especially from rural to urban areas. The average number of people per household is much the same throughout the study areas, though there were large extended and immediate families of more than 10 people.

78

79

The centralisation within Apia town of services such as better health facilities, schools, paid employment were the main attraction for the majority of the migrants who opted to move from rural to urban areas. Vailele near Apia is densely populated with the traditional village site along the main road near the coast while the majority of the migrant population lives further inland on freehold land. Vailele’s population was 1,276 in 1991 (Department of Statistics, 1993) and in 2001 the population had increased to 3,175 (Statistical Services, 2001).

Gagaifolevao comprises 14.5% of Lefaga District’s population. The majority of Gagaifolevao’s population in previous years settled on the flat coastal area near the sea but after Cyclones Ofa and Val in 1990 and 1991 many people shifted inland.

Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga comprise about 20.5% of Vaa-o-Fonoti/Fagaloa District’s population. Because Fagaloa area descends abruptly from steep high mountains to the narrow flat low-lying coastal plain (Figure 4.2), the populations of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina like other Fagaloa Villages are concentrated along the narrow coastal plain next to the sea.

Figure 4.2: Steepmountainousarea of Fagaloaoverlooking the Fagaloa Bay

The plantations and farms are located mainly on steep hillsides and the road connecting the main road to the coast cuts through the mountains behind Ta’elefaga Village.

80

4.3 SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND GENDER ROLES

All villages in Samoa follow the same structure of the hierarchical chiefly system (Figure 4.3). The social structure in Samoa establishes the roles of the villagers themselves in various social groups and as individuals. Extended and immediate Samoan families also function this way as people of the community act and work according to their roles.

Figure 4.3: Samoan social structure

Council of Chiefs (Fono a Matai)

1. High chiefs (Ali'i) 2. Talking chiefs/ orators (Tulafale)

Chiefs' wives

Unmarried women Sa'oao/Aualuma

Untitled men (Aumaga/Taulele'a

Children(Tamaiti)

1. Faletua 2. Tausi

As seen in figure 4.3 the village council (fono) and its member chiefs (matai) constitute the apex of the structure. As such, it has the authority over the communal ownership of village assets including land and fishing grounds. The improvement and standard of a village is determined by the decisions and vision of the fono. The council of chiefs vary in villages in the way they function and make use of their natural resources, whether in a sustainable or unsustainable manner.

81

Since each extended family in a village belongs to a certain high chief they are entitled to land for settlement and plantations allocated by the village council under its structure. However, neither a chief nor his family owns the land as it is technically village/community land; thus a village council can banish any chief or person from the village or from village land for misconduct.

The untitled men (aumaga) are the backbone of any community as they carry out the heavy chores and work in serving the village chiefs’ council and their families. They do manual labour like communal fishing when the village council has a meeting, fishing for their families, working in their plantations and doing the cooking in an earthen oven (umu) and boiling on open fire (saka).

The chiefs’ wives (faletua, tausi) and unmarried women (aualuma) in villages carry out duties like weaving and participate in beautification of their villages as well as reef gleaning activities. The women in villages make up the women’s committee, which deals with village hygiene and making handicraft such as baskets, fans, thatches and blinds of traditional houses (fale) as well as weaving mats (fala) and fine mats (ietoga). The children assist the women and older siblings at home with light family chores thus adopting the roles they will carry out within the family and community when they are older.

4.4 SOURCES OF INCOME IN VILLAGES STUDIED

In the case study villages most of the adults are not formally employed and many of the familymembers work in their plantation, fish and carry out domestic chores.

Agricultural products like taro and bananas are taken to the market in town to earn income and buy other family necessities. Apart from these crops kava is one of the main income earning commodities for Fagaloa people; tobacco is grown, but for individual use and not commercially.

There are no formal businesses established in these rural villages to offer formal employment and those who are formally employed commute to and from work in Apia Town. A few men work part-time in Ta’elefaga in shifts operating the generators of the hydro power station, thus earning income as well as working in their plantations.

82

At Gagaifo, various commercial activities such as exporting small coloured finfish and coral from its lagoon took place in previous years although these operations no longer exist. These individual family businesses mined and exported corals and small coloured finfish to Asian markets in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

The main sources of village income are their farms/plantations and some particularly from fishing mainly in Vailele Village (Figures 4.4 a and 4.4b).

Figure 4.4a: Selling sea cucumbers and urchins at roadside Figure 4.4b: Fisher gathering sea urchin (Vailele)

Vailele is a fishing village where as seen in figure 4.4b many women fish in the inshore area for shellfish and other seafood like sea hares, sea cucumbers and sea urchins for subsistence needs and limited sales along the roadside.

The household surveys carried out in the four villages illustrate the uses of seafood catches by families (Figure 4.5).

Household uses of catch at the four study villages

2%

42%

56%

eat

sell & eat

eat &distributeto families

Figure 4.5: Households use of catch

83

Figure 4.5 demonstrates that 42% of the seafood collected is sold. Some respondents stated that the large fishes, lobsters and crabs are sold and the surpluses of small size species (about quarter of the catch) are normally eaten by the family. On the basis of this estimation, consumption of fishers’ catches according to the household survey ranges from 50 to 65%.

4.5 COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS OF STUDY VILLAGES

The coastal and nearshore (gataifale) areas include settlement near the sea, the beach and shore (mat faga), lagoon (aloalo) and the reef (a’au). According to the category of coastal types (Figure 3.5.) stated by Kear and Wood (1959) Fagaloa (where Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina locates) falls under coastline Type II, containing cliff coasts and little or no reef development, while Vailele and Gagaifolevao at Lefaga fall under Type III, with features like beaches, coastal swamps associated with rivers and fringing reefs with gaps due to freshwater outputs (Richmond, 1991).

Zann (1991) recorded the coast of Fagaloa Bay as about 8 km with 210 hectares of reefal area. Reefs are present at Fagaloa Bay but not well developed, especially at Ta’elefaga Village where an opening in the reef exists in the middle coast of the Bay (see Figure 4.6). Steep mountains overlook Fagaloa Bay with a number of rivers and creeks flowing out into the sea (Figure 4.6).

84

Figure 4.6: Fagaloa showing river patterns and coastline

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.6 shows the patterns of the rivers that flow from the high mountains of Fagaloa, which have a great impact on the coast and marine environment of this area. As a result sedimentation is the main problem facing the marine environment of Fagaloa area. The water from Afulilo Dam (Figure. 4.6) diverts through a tunnel to the hydro-electricity power station at Ta’elefaga Village and is later discharged to the Taelefaga River and the lagoon of the village.

At Lefaga Bay where Gagaifo Village is located the coast extends from Matafa’a to the Return to Paradise beach at Matautu (Figure 4.7). Zann (1991) records that the coast of Lefaga Bay is about 12 km in length and there are 460 ha of reef area and 8.2 km of reef edge. Also the wider in-filled barrier reef that is 0.5 to 1.3km wide extends from this area of Matafa’a to Matautu, from where it narrows into a fringing reef of about 50 to 100 metres wide (Figure 4.7).

85

Figure 4.7: The coast of Lefaga showing the scattered settlement of Gagaifolevao

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.7 shows that the only River (called Liua le Vai o Sina) in Lefaga District is located to the west of Falease’ela Village and a mangrove community exists in its estuary near Matafa'a Village.In contrast with the villages of Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, Gagaifo’s lagoon is largely covered with corals and fringing reefs, particularly to the west of the village. The sparsely scattered population is obvious from the aerial photograph with people having spread along the roads from the coast inland and more relocated inland after the cyclones in the early 1990s.

The lagoon of Gagaifo is shallow though deeper and deep on the east end and near the reef. There is also a flattened coral rubble bank on the reef at the west, which according to some respondents was deposited during the cyclone in 1966.

86

In Gagaifo Village, lava rock outcrops with pockets of sand in between extend from shore to the lagoon mainly on the western and eastern ends of the village with pocket beaches that also exist (Figure 4.8).

Figure 4.8: The west area lagoon of Gagaifo showing corals, fringing reef and pocket beach (Masavai)

Lava rocks & corals/ fringing reefs.

Fringing reefs at Gagaifo normally do not emerged at low tide except during extremely low spring tides as seen in Figure 4.8.

Zann (1991) reported that the inshore lagoon of Vailele is dominated by seagrass beds (Syringodium isoetifolum), which have spread possibly as a result of nutrient pollution due to discharged wastes from a piggery and a soap factory at Vailele in the late 1970s to the 1980s.

The coast/shore of Vailele is mainly flat and sandy with a wide shallow lagoon except near the Bay of Vailele near Letogo on the east where the lagoon tends to become deep (Figure 4.9).

87

Figure 4.9: Aerial photograph of Vailele showing dense population, lagoon and reef area

Source: Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment Mapping (modified by Semi Lesa and researcher)

Figure 4.9 shows the high population density of Vailele that is concentrated along the coast and extends further inland. Small streams are present at the ends of Vailele at the two neighbouring villages. Zann (1991) noted that sedimentation occurred on the reefs adjacent the Letogo Stream on the east and Fagali’i Stream on the west of Vailele. The reef of Vailele is well developed but after the 1990 and 1991 cyclones islands of coral rubble were deposited on the reef flat of Vailele.

4.6 RESULTS: COASTAL VEGETATION AND USEFUL PLANTS

The coastal vegetation of the study areas is quite similar with the occurrence of the same coastal trees, shrubs, creepers and weeds. The 10 detailed questionnaire with social groups of men and women in the four villages (3 each from large villages of Vailele and Gagaifo and 2 each from small villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga) recorded a variety of coastal trees, shrubs and creepers, and identified those considered most important in their villages (Table 4.2).

88

Table 4.2: Coastal plant species identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) Some groups listed more than others); 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages. Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Important plant species

listed byStudy villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Fau Beach hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceus 3 2 2 3 10Futu Fish-poison tree Barringtonia asiatica 3 2 2 3 10Niu Coconut Cocos nucifera 3 2 2 3 10Milo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populnea 3 2 2 2 9Talie Tropical almond Terminalia samoensis

Terminalia catappa2 2 2 3 9

Fetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllum 1 2 2 3 8Pu’a Chinese-lantern tree Hernandia

nymphaeifolia2 2 3 7

Leva Cerbera Cerbera manghas 2 1 2 5Gatae Coral tree Erythrina variegata 1 1 2 1 5Ifi Tahitian chestnut Inocarpus fagifer 1 1 2 4Fu’afu’a Guest tree Kleinhovia hospita 2 1 1 2 4Fao Neisosperma Neisosperma

oppositifolium1 1 1 3

Togo Oriental mangrove or Red mangrove

Bruguiera gymnorrhizaRhizophora mangle

2 2

Pulu Indian banyan? Ficus benghalensis 2 2Pualulu Pua Fagraea berteroana 1 1 2Ifilele Intsia bijuga 1 1 2 Tausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argentea 1 1 Mati Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabra 1 1Pu’a vai Pisonia Pisonia grandis 1 1Lama Candlenut Aleurites moluccana 1 1Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium

umbellatum3 2 1 3 9

Nonu Indian mulberry Morinda citrifolia 2 1 1 2 6Fisoa Colubrina asiatica 2 1 2 5Fasa/laufala Screwpine Pandanus tectorius 2 1 1 1 5Ti Ti plant Cordyline fruticosa 1 1 1 1 4Aloalo tai/suniatai Beach privet Clerodendrum inerme 1 1 1 3Ateate Beach sunflower Wollastonia biflora 2 1 3Paogo Pandanus Pandanus turritus 1 1 2Laau failafa Candlebush Senna alata 1 1 2Aloalo Premma Premna serratifolia 1 1 Gau Island myrtle Alyxia stellata 1 1Laumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australis 1 1 Namulega Beach vitex Vitex trifolia 1 1Masame Glochidion ramiflorum 1 1Vines/Weeds Fue sina Beach pea Vigna marina 3 1 1 3 8Fue moa Beach morning glory Ipomoea pes-caprae 2 1 1 2 6Tifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloides 1 1

89

Togotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiatica 1 1Ferns Lau auta Scented fern Phymatosorus grossus 1 1

The survey results (Table 4.2) show that there are some 19 coastal trees, 14 shrubs and a few vines and ferns listed as amongst the most important according to the respondents. The main common coastal trees in these four villages include the beach hibiscus (fau); fish poison tree (futu); coconut (niu); Pacific rosewood (milo); tropical almond (talie); Alexandrian laurel (fetau);coral tree (gatae) and the guest tree (fu’afu’a). Other important species include the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a); Cerbera manghas (leva); Tahitian chestnut (ifi); Neisosperma oppositifolium(fao); mangroves (togo); Fagraea berteroana (pualulu); dyer’s fig (mati); tree heliotrope (tausuni); pisonia (pu’a vai); candlenut (lama); Intsia bijuga (ifilele) and the Ficus benghalensis(pulu), which is found only at Ma’asina.

Shrubs listed are Dendrolobium (lala); Indian mulberry (nonu); Colubrina asiatica (fisoa);screwpine (fasa); ti plant (ti); Clerodendrum inerme (aloalo tai); beach sunflower (ateate);candlebush (la’au failafa) and others as named by separate villages and groups. The beach pea (fue sina) and the beach morning glory (fue moa) were the widespread vines stated and only the Phymatosorus grossus (lau auta) was named within the fern group species.

Out of the four study villages a mangrove community exists only at Ta’elefaga at the western estuary (Figure 4.10). The two types of mangroves found there are the Bruguiera gymnorrhizaand the Rhizophora mangle (both togo).

90

Figure. 4.10:Mangrovecommunity on the west end ofTa'elefaga Village

Figure 4.10 shows the togo forest, the source area of mangrove crabs (pa’alimago) and the venus clam (tugane). A family living next to the mangrove community has a fixed gillnet at the mouth of the mangrove estuary to catch mangrove crabs.

At Gagaifo Village, a fresh-water swamp exists at the eastern end of the village where the vegetation is dominated by screwpine, Pandanus tectorius (fasa), Cyclosorus interruptus (vao tuaniu) and some other ferns (Figure 4.11). Similar plant species exist in swampy areas at Vailele with an abundance of candlebush (la’au failafa) mixed with screwpine.

Figure 4.11:Swampat Gagaifo Village

91

Other common plants found in these swamps are beach hibiscus (fau), guest tree (fu’afu’a) and Tahitian chestnut (ifi) at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo. The swamps at Gagaifo and Vailele and mangroves at Ta’elefaga have been greatly disturbed by people for settlement, firewood gathering, and waste disposal as well as damaged by animals like pigs and cows, as seen at Ta’elefaga.

Small plantations of coconut palms and banana patches exist along the shores of Vailele and Ma’asina. The vegetation on the shores of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga is scattered with few littoral species remaining next to the sea. Deliberately planted tropical almonds (talie) and coconuts aremixed with coastal plants in these four villages.

Springs on shores still provide brackish and fresh water at Vailele and Gagaifo. The coastal people at Gagaifo, which have limited access to tap water, depend on the brackish spring water (during low tide) on their shore for daily washing and bathing (Figures 4.12a and 4.12b).

Figure 4.12a: Spring water pool at Vailele providing Figure 4.12b Brackish water available at low tide at the fresh water for cooking, washing and bathing coast of Gagaifo use for bathing and washing

The questionnaire surveys and interviews showed that the male groups were most familiar with trees and shrubs they frequently use for domestic and social needs such as building, carving or firewood. Many traditional healers (taulasea) are women and thus have familiarity with the plants they use for treating illnesses, many of which are for children’s ailments, that use a variety of trees and shrubs as well as vines and creepers (Table 4.3).

92

Table 4.3: List of plant species with medicinal uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (NB: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) Some groups listed more than others); 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan/Common Names

Scientific Name Medicinal Uses Important plant species Listed by Study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Milo/Pacific rosewood

Thespesia populnea women post-birth sickness (failele gau), children’s ailments, stomach ache, eyes

3 2 2 2 9

Talie/ Tropical almond

Terminalia spp. children’s ailments, eye problems

2 2 2 3 9

Fau/ Beach hibiscus

Hibiscus tiliaceus children’s ailments, injuries, asthma, diarrhoea, urinary problems

3 1 2 2 8

Niu/Coconut Cocos nucifera root for injuries, nut/husk – children’s ailments

3 1 2 2 8

Fetau/Alexandrianlaurel

Calophylluminophyllum

diarrhoea, eye problems 1 1 2 2 6

Pu’a/ Chinese-lantern tree

Hernandianymphaeifolia

women post-birth remedy (failele gau), diarrhea

1 2 3 6

Futu/Fishpoison tree

Barringtonia asiatica skin sickness/rash, children’s ailments

2 1 2 5

Fu’afu’a/Guesttree

Kleinhovia hospita Injuries 1 1 1 2 5

Leva Cerbera manghas skin problems and sores 1 1 1 1 4Mati/Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabra burns, eye problems 1 1 Lama/ Candle-nut

Aleurites moluccana skin rashes, fungus & sores 1 1

Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium

Umbellatumburns, asthma?, children’s ailments

3 3 6

Nonu/ Indian mulberry

Morinda citrifolia massage headaches, boils, inflammation (m m ),remedy for eye pimple, asthma etc.

2 1 1 2 6

Fisoa Colubrina asiatica flu, women post-birth sickness (failelegau)

2 2 4

Ti Cordyline fruticosa massage of headaches,inflammations (m m )

1 1 1 1 4

Aloalotai/suniatai

Clerodendruminerme

post-birth sickness, inflammation (m m ),children’s ailments (ila)

1 1 1 3

Ateate/ Beach sunflower

Wollastonia biflora injuries, inflammation (m m ), women post-birth illness

2 1 3

La’au failafa/ Candlebush

Senna alata ringworm 1 1 2

93

Aloalo Premna serratifolia children’s ailments (m m ) 1 1Laumafiafia/Wax plant

Hoya australis children’s sickness (m m ) 1 1

Namulega Vitex trifolia asthma 1 1Masame Glochidion

ramiflorummouth sores 1 1

Vines Fue sina/ Beach pea

Vigna marina children’s ailments, injuries, postbirth sickness, tooth aches, cure supernatural sickness (saua)

3 1 1 3 8

Fue moa/ Beach morning glory

Ipomoea pes-caprae eye ointment, children sickness (m m ), women post-birth illnesses, urinary illness

2 1 1 2 6

Togo/Asiaticpennywort

Centella asiatica burn, supernatural caused diseases (saua)

1 1

Ferns Lau auta Phymatosorus

grossuschildren’s ailments (m m ,ila), women post birth illnesses,

1 1

The plants most commonly listed as important and widely use for Samoan healing (f f ) included Pacific rosewood (milo), tropical almond (talie), beach hibiscus (fau), coconut (niu), vines like the beach morning glory (fue sina), beach pea (fue moa) and shrubs like the wax plant (laumafiafia), aloalo and aloalo tai for children remedies. Common ailments include those that affect infants such as fever, skin inflammations (m m ) and ila, as well as illness affecting women after giving birth (failele gau).

The uses of coastal plants also included commercial earnings from carvings, handicraft tools and other households needs (Table 4.4).

94

Table 4.4: List of plant uses identified in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan/Common Names

Scientific Name Uses: F-food; H/C-handicraft & Carving; T-tools; O- others; P –Poison; D- Domestic (building, ropes, woven thatches/blinds etc), firewood

Important plant species listed by Study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total Que.

X/10

Total UseofPlnt

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X10

Tot use

Niu/Coconut Cocos nucifera F- meat for cream etc, juice, pig feed; H/C– decorations/ traditional wear fashions, souvenirs;D – buildings/posts/floor, sinnet, thatches/ blinds/weaving etc.

33

3

21

2

21

2

33

3

108

10 28

Fau/ Beach hibiscus

Hibiscus tiliaceus T- fishing tool; H/C- bowls, cricket bats, boats, wooden drums (p t ),laces, decorations etc; D- building, ropes (tying)

33

3

12

2

12

1

13

2

610

6 24Talie/ Tropical almond

Terminalia spp. F- seed eaten by children H/C- bowls (kava/food), paddlesO- wind/wave breaker/ protectionD- dye use in mats, firewood

1

2

2211

2211

3222

8646 24

Futu/Fishpoison tree

Barringtoniaasiatica

H/C- statues, souvenirs, fine mats cover when cleanse; P– fish poison O- fix leaks of canoes

1

3

1

2

1

21

1

3

4

101 15

Fetau/Alexandrianlaurel

Calophylluminophyllum

H/C- laces, paddles etcO- washing fine mats

1 2 21

2 71

8Pu’a/ Chinese-lantern tree

Hernandianymphaeifolia

H/C- laces, wood drums (p t )

2 2 3 78

Ifi/Tahitianchestnut

Inocarpus fagifer F- food; D- firewood O- wind/wave breaker protection

1 11

21

1 52 7

Fu’afu’a/Guesttree

Kleinhovia hospita D - stick to carry loads (amo), firewood

3 1 1 2 77

Milo/Pacific rosewood

Thespesiapopulnea

H- small wood souvenirs, bowls (kava, food); T- handle of fishing spear

1 1 2

1

1 5

1 6Leva Cerbera manghas H/C – decorations 1 1 1 1 4 4Gatae/Coraltree

Erythrina variegata O – hedges/posts; cattle feed

1 1 1 1 4 4

Fao Neisospermaoppositifolium

F– seed eaten by children;D – firewood

1 1 1 33

Ifilele Intsia bijuga C- Carving handicrafts 1 2 3

95

Togo/Orientalmangrove/Redmangrove

Bruguieragymnorrhiza/Rhizophoramangle

O- dye (mats), fish nursery, wind/wave breaker protection

2 2

2Pulu/Indianbanyan?

Ficusbenghalensis

O- waves/wind breaker D – firewood

2 2 2

Pualulu Fagraeaberteroana

H/C - decoration (scent) 1 1 2 2

Tausuni/Treeheliotrope

Tournefortiaargentea

D- hard wood as posts e.g. for hanging washing etc

1 11

Pu’a vai Pisonia grandis H-handicrafts/lacesD - firewood

1 1 1

Shrubs Lala Dendrolobium O- cover fish; T- poles for

fish nets/fences; D– firewood 2 2 1 1 6

6Fisoa Colubrina asiatica D-soap (used in olden days), 2 1 2 5 5Fasa/screw- pine

Pandanustectorius

H/C- laces (seeds/fruit) T- eel traps’ signals

2 1 11

41 5

Paogo Pandanusturritus/whitmeeau

D- weaving various types of mats, fans etc

1 1 22

Gau Alyxia stellata H/C- laces (bark) 1 1 1Vines/weeds Tifa/St.Thomas bean

Entadaphaseoloides

H/C- seeds for laces 1 1 1

As would be expected, the coconut is the most widely used and important tree that caters for a diversity of household needs, consumption and medicine. The villages have planted coconuts (niu) and tropical almonds (talie) for coastal protection from erosion (Figures 4.13a and 4.13.b). A range of species was also planted as ornamentals and as living fences or hedges for example the coral tree (gatae) that is commonly grown as a living fence.

Figure 4.13a: Planting coconut for coastal protection at Figure 4.13b: Tropical almond and coconut the east end of Gagaifo tress along the shore of Ma’asina

Wood carving, for example of wooden bowls for kava and food, cricket bats, paddles and some handicrafts, was practised only at the villages of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina using beach hibiscus

96

(fau), fish poison tree (futu), Pacific rosewood (milo), pisonia (pu’a vai) and ifilele. However, nowadays these activities are not often practised compared to previous years. Most of the coastal plants listed are still present in a scattered pattern in the case study areas, with a few species having declined in abundance in recent years (Table 4.5).

Table 4.5: Perception that specified coastal plant species known and listed have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004. Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Coastal plantsDeclined (d), Rare (r) & Depleted (dp) X/10

Total

TreesGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Pu’a Chinese lantern tree Hernandia nymphaeifolia 1d 1d 2Fetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllum 1d 1d 2 Milo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populnea 1d 1d 2Ifilele Intsia bijuga 1r 1r 2 Leva Cerbera manghas 1d 1Futu Fish poison tree Barringtonia asiatica 1d 1Tausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argentea 1d 1 ShrubsAteate Beach sunflower Wollastonia biflora 1r 1d 2 Aloalotai Clerodendrum inerme 1d 1Laumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australis 1r 1 Vines/weedsTogotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiatica 1r 1Tifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloides 1r 1

Low plants tend to disappear easily, compared to trees due to their lowland spread and vulnerability to tropical cyclones that cause coastal erosion at the study villages. Main examples are the shrubs and vines that have become rare, such as the beach sunflower (ateate) and Asiatic pennywort (togotogo) at Gagaifo, wax plant (laumafiafia) at Vailele and St. Thomas bean (tifa) at Ma’asina, some of which are among the most important medicinal plants.

Some other species, that have declined include the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a), Alexandrian laurel (fetau) at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo as well as the Pacific rosewood (milo) at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The Intsia bijuga (ifilele) was common at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in previous years; however, this plant is now rare due to cutting down for carving handicrafts. According to some respondents the current scarcity of ifilele may have caused the reduction in carving activities at

97

these villages nowadays. When ifilele declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina some carvers used to cut ifilele from Uafato but this activity has been banned by Uafato Village. Clearing for road construction has led to the loss of some of these plants from Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. Also these plants were destroyed by tropical cyclones at the sites particularly Gagaifo and Vailele.

4.7 INFRA-STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACTS

Coastal plants that protect the beaches and the coast of villages have been destroyed by settlement and cyclones in the past years. Villagers living near shores have altered the coastlines and have tried to protect these areas from wave action by building boulder or rubble seawalls, as seen at Ta’elefaga (Figure 4.14a) and Vailele (Figure 4.14b).

Figure 4.14a: Rock seawall for coastal protection from Figure 4.14b: A coral rubble seawall built by a wave erosion at Ta’elefaga River mouth family at Vailele

Families at Ta’elefaga collect pebbles and stones from the Ta’elefaga River mouth for building a coastal seawall and for other domestic uses like house foundations.

At Vailele people use coral rubble that has been blown onto the reef and shore by cyclones to protect sand from wave erosion, however sand still erodes even with these efforts to prevent it. Previous cyclones in 1990 and 1991 eroded much of these research areas’ coasts causing individual families to build their own boulder/rubble seawalls and to plant trees, mainly tropical almond (talie) and coconut palms (niu).

The Afulilo Reservoir (Figure 4.6) is located on an area that used to be a large native swamp forest known as the Punataemo’o and the Vaipu Basin that were connected by the Afulilo

98

waterfall. Pearsall and Whistler (1991) gave this site top priority ranking amongst ecosystems needing concerted conservation efforts should the damming occur. This hydro electricity dam, which began operation in 1993, has caused many environmental problems that the rural people of Fagaloa could not have foreseen at the time of construction.

The water from the Afulilo Reservoir is diverted through a tunnel to Ta’elefaga Village, where the power station is located, and discharged as wastewater from the power station into the Ta’elefaga River causing the murky and discoloured lagoon (Figures 4.15a and 4.15b).

The continuous rapid flow of the Ta’elefaga River increases the runoff of pebbles and soil towards the coast. The increased velocity of the river poses danger and discomfort to the villagers, who complained of noise pollution and discolored water that ends up in the lagoon. In dry periods the dropping of the water level of the Afulilo Reservoir to near dry point creates an unpleasant swampy smell in the water that ended up at Ta’elefaga.

Figures 4.15a and 4.15b: Discoloured lagoon of Ta’elefaga Village due to wastewater from the hydroelectric power station

The power station reportedly endangers the marine life of Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa Bay due to increased sedimentation with the continuous rapid flow of Ta’elefaga stream. As a result the lagoon is always murky brown (Figures 4.15a and 4.15b) and unsuitable for fishing activities. The Ta’elefaga River that the discharges wastewater from the hydro-electricity power station overflows mainly in the wet season.

99

At Gagaifo Village another tar sealed road was built about 300-400 metres from the coast when the road next to the sea was damaged after the cyclones in 1990 and 1991. Parts of the village’s coconut plantations near the coast have been felled for the building of this road and some of the families relocated there.

The study villages are experiencing coastal erosion. The roads at Fagaloa and at Gagaifo are next to the sea and they were destroyed and eroded by cyclones Ofa and Val in 1990 and 1991. The erosion of the coasts of these villages, which have limited flat land such as Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, is a current concern (Figures 4.16 a–d).

Figures 4.16 a–d: Coastal erosion along the shores of the study villages

a) Gagaifo: The coast and road being eroded b) Ta'elefaga: Mangrove estuary and coastal road

d) Ta'elefaga: Less coastal plants & road next to sea c) Vailele: Coral rubble to protect sand from eroding

100

4.8 OTHER COASTAL IMPACTS: AGRICULTURE, LITTER AND SAND MINING

Shifting plantation and agriculture at Gagaifo and Vailele are concentrated in inland forest areas and have little impact on coastal areas and marine life, compared to the more substantial impacts at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Fagaloa Bay is surrounded by steep mountains and lacks flat land for farms and plantations. In the wet season rapid runoff occurs especially at Ta’elefaga where the main road cut through the mountains behind this village. Increased runoff from uplands and rivers with discharged wastewater from the power station accelerates sedimentation. These have contributed to coastal and nearshore problems in Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa as a whole.

Household waste disposal was seen but not considered a serious concern in the study villages as compared to the urban areas. However, the accumulation of non-degradable and plastic materials is increasing at rural villages. At Gagaifo plastics and tins are discarded in the coastal zone behind the committee house that is used for village functions. Metals and rusty iron roofs were seen at the coast of Ta’elefaga and broken bottles and plastics at some areas of Ma’asina and Vailele coasts.

Villagers still practice sand mining, particularly in Vailele and Gagaifo, where there are white sandy beaches (Figure 4.17a and Figure 4.17b).

Figure 4.17a: Children at Vailele extracting sand for Figure 4.17b: Sand mining at Gagaifo forbeautification of house surroundings construction purposes

People mine sand for beautification of their surroundings and for mixing cement for building houses. But this activity is carried out on only a minor scale and does not seem to be a significant threat to the ecological balance of these coastal areas.

101

CHAPTER FIVE NEARSHORE MARINE BIODIVERSITY OF THE STUDY VILLAGES

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter first discusses the marine environment and biodiversity, the abundance and how the villages use these resources (5.2 – 5.10). The second part (5.11) explains the impacts of people and natural disasters on fisheries and other marine species and then identifies management efforts (5.12) in the study villages.

5.2 FISHERIES FOR SURVIVAL AND FISHING ACTIVITIES

Artisanal (small-scale commercial fishing with surplus for consumption) and subsistence (for family consumption) fishing in relation to this research are the main fishing activities that provide for the local villagers’ protein needs. Finfish and other seafood are the main source of protein and essential for special occasions in all villages. The results of the household surveys (Figures 5.1a) in the study villages showed the importance of marine resources in the local diet. This was particularly significant at Vailele Village, which consumes a wider variety of seafood apart from finfish compared with Gagaifo, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

Seafood consum ption per w eek at the four case study areas

19%

42%33%

6%once/w k2 days/w kthree days/w kfour days/w k

Figure 5.1a: Consumption per week in households at the four study villages

Figure 5.1a illustrates the total consumption of marine species per week, showing that about 39% of households consume finfish and other various seafood types three to four times per week. For example at Vailele, in addition to finfishes many families also consume a wide range of marine

102

invertebrates such as sea hares, sea cucumbers, pen shells and sea urchins twice or three times a week. A further 42% of the households in the four villages consume seafood twice a week and about 19% eat seafood at least once a week.

The results of the household interviews were supported by the creel surveys, which recorded fishers’ catches on the spot (Figure 5.1b).

Figure 5.1b: Uses of Fishers' uses of catch

49%

16%

19%

15% 1%

eat sell eat & sell eat & for function/occasion bait (eel traps)

fishers’ catches in the study villages

The fishers’ creel surveys in figure 5.1b showed that 49% fished solely for their families’ consumption, 9% fished for selling with surplus from the catches to be eaten, 15% was to use catches for special functions like meetings, food for teachers of the local school or for visitors (Figure 5.2a and 5.2b).

Figures 5.2a: Cooked crab (pa'a), moray eels (fai'ai pusi) Figure 5.2b Cooked large finfish and lobster for and bottle of sea cucumber/gonads (fugafuga, sea) visitor’s meal

103

The fishers’ creel survey show similar results to the household interviews in figure 5.1a and the total estimate of catches for consumption range from 50 to 65%. Even though this reflects the significance on fishing and of seafood, many households at Fagaloa and Gagaifo consumed finfish purchased from shops or the fish market in Apia or from fishers within their own village.

Many people at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina do not fish as often nowadays as they used to, reportedly because their impoverished lagoons now lack many marine species they used to depend on in previous years. Those that fished in the daytime are mainly fishers using gill and cast nets. Spear diving is often carried out at nighttime at Gagaifo and a few fishers at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina that fish near and beyond the reef where the lagoon is less murky.

Fishing activities illustrated in Table 5.1 shows that females gathering sea cucumbers, sea urchins, sea hares and shellfishes did many of the fishing activities at Vailele. Fishers at Gagaifo were predominantly males that carried out spearing and diving, particularly at nighttime.

Table 5.1: Number of creel surveys/catches inventories during fieldwork in four study villages in Samoa from July to August 2004

Fishers’ village Males Females Total Research time (wks) Vailele 18 26 44 1½ weeks Gagaifo 39 5 41 2½ weeks Ta’elefaga 16 1 17 1 week Ma’asina 4 2 6 1 week Total 74 34 108 6 weeks

During the six weeks fieldwork the total number of fishers’ catches recorded was 108 in the four villages. Of the total of 34 women fishers, 26 were recorded at Vailele and 5 in Gagaifo. In the two weeks of the research at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina only three females went fishing to gather Asaphis shellfish (pipi). Most of the fishers recorded at Gagaifo were mainly the night diving and spearing males and a few of them fishing in the daytime using gill and cast nets.

5.3 CORALS AND REEFS

Research in 1996 by Green included a site at Lefaga and one at Fagaloa Bay but not exactly in Ta’elefaga or Ma’asina (Fagaloa) or Gagaifo (Lefaga). The sites used in the 1996 research were located at the reef fronts and the result showed the healthy condition of the reef fronts of Fagaloa

104

and Lefaga. This healthy coral condition of Fagaloa was due to the site’s location outside/beyond the reef, where they are bathed in clear oceanic waters, while the inshore lagoon is more subjected to poor water quality.

The villagers have less knowledge of specific coral names than fish names but they have identified some of the common stony corals present (Table 5.2).

Table 5.2: Frequency that specified species of corals found and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Some groups listed more than; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Corals identified by fishers from the study villages–Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Stony corals Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 x/10

Amu’amu/feofeo? Staghorn coral Acropora spp. (branching) 3 2 2 2 9 Tu/Puga Massive coral Porites spp. 3 1 2 2 8Lapa Plate coral Acropora (tabulate) 3 2 1 2 8Punau Stinging/fire coral MilleporaAmu ula Red coral Stylaster

Pavona cactus? 2? Solitary corals Fungia? 2 1Blue coral? 2

Soft corals Alcyonaria 2 1 Amu galemulemu Sarcophyton

trochiliophorum?

In Table 5.2 the fishers identified the massive corals and staghorn corals like the Porites (tu) and Acropora as being found at study sites. Gagaifo with fringing reefs and corals that covered much of its lagoon had a greater diversity of stony corals compared to Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.Healthy soft corals were observed by snorkelling at Gagaifo Village, like the two types in Figure 5.3a.

Figure 5.3a: Soft coralsat Gagaifo

105

Soft corals in Figure 5.3a are mainly scattered in the middle lagoon near the shore of Gagaifo, an area that used to be the village’s reserve area under the Samoa Fishing Project. Corals are quite healthy in this area and on the west end of the lagoon (Figure 5.3b). On the east end dead corals were witnessed. This was reportedly a result of heavy use of Derris mallaccensis (ava niukini),a source of rotenone, as a fish poison up until the early 1990s, though corals are now regenerating (Figure 5.3c).

Figure 5.3b: Healthy plate corals at Gagaifo Figure 5.3c: Regenerating corals at Gagaifo

The crown-of-thorns starfish was also problematic in the 1980s to early 1990s and contributed to the dying of corals. The other common coral problem at Gagaifo is coral breakage due to fishing methods used for example some families gather sea anemones for commercial purposes.

Corals in the lagoon of Vailele are healthy but often overturned by fishers collecting sea urchins, sea cucumbers, shellfish and other marine species. Reefs exist at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga though the latter are not well developed opposite the perennial Ta’elefaga River where water from the power station is discharged.

Corals in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga are degraded and are dying due to sedimentation from upland runoff, as illustrated by the poor condition seen in Figure 5.4a and 5.4b. Sediments deposited on tops of Porites thus hinder the upward growth of the corals, though the sides are still living (Figure 5.4b).

106

Figure 5.4a: Degraded corals at Ta’elefaga Figure 5.4b: Dead tops of Porites at Ta’elefaga

Figures 5.4a and 5.4b illustrate dying stony corals in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga and about five soft white corals were seen (by snorkelling) in this lagoon as well, which will totally disappear soon with the current situation of sedimentation.

5.4 LARGE NEARSHORE FINFISHES

Large and small finfishes are essential for consumption, special occasions and earning income in villages. However, nowadays frozen and canned meat is replacing finfish in many traditional occasions such as corned beef, mutton flaps and mainly tinned fish that is becoming more prominent in daily family meals.

The group questionnaires discussion in the four villages listed about 30 different large nearshore finfishes and at least 20 family/groups of similar species are considered to be very important in their villages (Table 5.3). All of these species are reported as being sold commercially and eaten as part of subsistence consumption in all study villages. Some fish Samoan names encompass more than one species and some species have more than one Samoan name such as the goatfish (vete, afulu, matulau, i'asina) and others vary depending on their different sizes, for example mullet – ua (juvenile), fuafua (medium) and anae (large sized).

107

Table 5.3: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were listed as being among the 20 most significant, in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups were not able to list 20 species and some listed more 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Large near shore finfish present at study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Anae Mullet Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscusMugil cephalus

3 2 2 3 10

Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinusamboinensis/olivaceus

3 2 2 3 10

Laea Parrotfish Scarus spp. 3 2 2 3 10SapoanaeMalauli/Ulua

Trevallies Caranx spp.,Uraspis secundaCarangoides spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Ume Unicornfish Naso spp. 3 2 2 3 10Galo H/Parrotfish Scarus gibbus?? 2 1 2 2 7Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp. 2 1 2 1 6Mat mu/Mu matavaivai

Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculus 1 2 2 0 5

Malatea/Tagafa

Humphead maori wrasse

Cheilinus undulates 2 1 1 1 5

Palani >15cm Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 2 1 1 1 5Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicus 2 1 1 1 5Ulapo Parrotfish Hipposcarus longiceps 2 0 1 2 5Ata’ata

Gatala moana

Grouper Coral trout P/grouper

Epinephelus septemfasciatusPlectropomus leopardusCephalopholis argus

1 1 1 1 4

Taiva Onespot Snapper Lutjanus monostigma 1 1 1 1 4Mala’i Humpback snapper Lutjanus gibbus 1 1 0 2 4Malava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteus 3 1 0 1 5A’u/Ise Long-tom Platybelone argalus platyura 0 1 2 1 4Mu Twinspot red snapper Lutjanus bohar 0 1 1 1 3Ganue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp. 0 1 1 1 3Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatus 2 0 0 1 3Sumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistes flavimarginatus 0 1 0 2 3Saosao Great barracuda Agrioposphyraena barracuda 0 1 1 0 2Ava Milkfish Chanos chanos 1 0 1 0 2Ali Flounder Samariscus triocellatus 0 1 0 1 2Filoa-muFiloa

Emperors Gymnocranius spp.Lethrinus spp.

0 0 0 1 1

Moana Goatfish Parupeneus spp. 1 0 0 0 1Sapat Barracudas Sphyraena spp. 1 0 0 0 1Papa Lunartail Cod Variola louti 0 0 1 0 1Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1 0 0 0 1Patagaloa Surge wrasse Thalassoma purpureum 1 0 0 0 1

108

The most important large finfish species mentioned by at least half of the survey groups include mullets (anae), ambon emperor (filoa) and other emperors (mat mu, filoamu), parrotfish (laea,galo, ulapo), trevallies (malauli, ulua), unicornfish (ume), pompano/dart (l l futu), goatfish (ta’ulaia, moana), surgeonfish (palani), humphead maori wrasse (malatea, tagafa) and surge wrasse (patagaloa). Other important species or groups of species included a range of groupers or rock cods (ata’ata), snappers (mala’i, mu, taiva), rudderfish (ganue), long tom (a’u),rabbitfish (malava), barracudas (saosao, sapat ), moonfish (koko), flounder (ali) and triggerfish (sumulaulau).

During the fieldwork some important large finfishes (Figures 5.5a–e) that were seen and caught nearshore by fishers and observed by snorkelling include the mullet (anae) and some parrotfishes (laea) in all villages. The unicornfish were caught at Ta’elefaga and Vailele from offshore diving and spearing. The trevallies (malauli) were seen at Vailele lagoon at high tide and fishers at these villages caught none while moonfish (koko) were caught at Gagaifo using gillnets. Filefish (ume aleva) were captured at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga and a long tom (a’u) was caught at Ma’asina by fishers using gillnets.

Figures 5.5a–e: Some important large finfishes caught at the study villages during the time of the fieldwork

5.4.1 Abundance of large near shore finfish

a)Gagaifo: b) Ta’elefaga: c) Ma’asina: filefish - ume aleva unicornfish - ume longtom - a’u

e) Ta’elefaga: gill net catch of mullets, emperors, parrotfish – anae, filoa, fuga

d) Gagaifo: moonfish and mullets caught using gill nets - koko, anae

109

5.4.1 Abundance of Large Nearshore Finfishes

Most of the large finfishes listed (Table 5.3) are still found and are not considered rare, although their numbers have declined. Fishers nowadays find it difficult to fish large finfishes and it takes longer hours to fish in order to get a good catch. The sizes of large finfishes have gone smaller now as compared to previous years. As a result of less quantity and smaller sizes, the cost of finfish has increased dramatically.

The large finfishes still in good supply at the four areas of study are the onespot snapper (taiva),the dot-tail goatfish (ta’ulaia) and mullet (anae) that are caught in the lagoon and near the reefs, mostly by fishers using gill nets. However, according to fishers of Ta’elefaga Village, the dot-tail goatfish (ta’ulaia) that used to be caught along the shore at night with methods like spearing can now be caught only by diving and spear fishing near the reef or outside the reef.

Many finfish, shellfish and invertebrates have now avoided or have disappeared from the discoloured dirty waters of Ta’elefaga’s inshore lagoon. Most of the large finfishes that used to be found in the lagoon of Ta’elefaga in previous years are now uncommon and can be found only near or beyond the reef.

The other large finfishes such as grouper (ata’ata); rudderfish (ganue); humphead snapper (mala’i); twinspot red snapper (mu); surgeonfish (palani) and parrotfish (ulapo) are still found even though in limited supply. However, they have declined in the lagoon and even beyond the reef where they used to be in good supply. Many reasons affect the quantity of large finfish, leading to the decline of some species that have now become rare or depleted within the villages of Gagaifo, Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga (Table 5.4).

110

Table 5.4: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species were listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele, 2) Other groups listed more than others 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Large finfish abundance Rare (r), declining(d) & depleted(dp)

Total

Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Malatea/Tagafa Humphead maori wrasse

Cheilinus undulates 2r 1r 1r 1d 5

Galo Steephead parrotfish Chlorurous microrrhinus 1r 1d 1r1dp

1 5

Sapoanae G-trevally Caranx ignobilis 1d 1d 1d 2Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinus amboinensis 1r 1Laea Parrotfish Scarus spp. 1d 1 Palani Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 1d 1 Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicus 1d Ume Unicornfish Naso spp. 1r 1Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp. 1r 1Matamu Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculus 1d 1Malava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteus 1r 1A’u/Ise Long tom Platybelone argalus

platyura1d 1

Sumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistesflavimarginatus

1d 1

Fugamea Parrotfish Scaridae 1d Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1d 1

The fish reported by respondents to be increasingly rare or depleted at their villages include the steephead parrotfish, Chlorurous microrrhinus (galo) and humphead maori wrasse Cheilinusundulatus (malatea) as the most vulnerable. At Gagaifo and Vailele, these fish are rare in the lagoon except beyond the reef that fishers stated these fishes are found but in declining numbers compared to the last 30 years. The fishers of Ta’elefaga stated that these fishes are now absent from their lagoon and rare offshore where they could be found if they fish for long hours at night.

Other large finfish that are declining include the trevally, Caranx ignobilis (sapo’anae/malauli),long tom, Platybelone argalus platyura (a’u) and rabbitfish, Siganus argenteus (malava). These are also rare both inshore and beyond the reef especially at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

111

At Vailele there is a decline of species like the ambon emperor, (filoa); other species of parrotfishes (laea); the reddish parrotfishes (fugamea); the surgeonfish Acanthurus bleekeri(palani) and the triggerfish, Pseudobalistes flavimarginatus (sumulaulau).Some species that have declined and become rare in Gagaifo include the pompana, (lalafutu);bigeye emperor, Monotaxis grandoculus (mat mu); unicornfish, Naso unicornis (ume) and the filefish (ume aleva).

5.5 SMALL NEARSHORE FINFISHES

The inshore lagoon is the most important fishing ground in Samoa where most fishing activities take place. Traditionally, small finfish found in the lagoon provides the daily basic protein for consumption in Samoan families.

Fishing nowadays is hard work according to many people, because it takes much longer hours to fish because of the declining numbers of small finfish. For many people now, especially those at Gagaifo, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, it is easy and cheaper to buy tinned fish.

Although most of the small finfish are still found in these villages (Table 5.5) the supply is not the same as it was in the past. Even those in good supply, have been decreasing in numbers and size.

Table 5.5: Frequency with which specified small finfishes were listed as being among the 20 most significant, nearshore species in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) some groups were not able to list 20 species and some listed more; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Small finfish present at Study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Alogo Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Manini Convict

surgeonfishAcanthurus triostegus 3 2 2 3 10

Pone <15cm Pala’ia-juveniles

Bristle-toothedsurgeonfish

Ctenochaetus striatus 3 2 2 3 10

Fuga Parrotfish Scarus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Gatala Groupers/cod Epinephelus spp. 3 2 2 3 10

112

Pa’u’ulu/kiko/Lo Rabbitfishes Siganus spp. 3 2 2 3 10Malau/tamalau Squirrelfishes

Soldierfishes

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Tifitifi

Alosina

Butterfly fishes Chaetodon spp.Forcipiger spp.Hemitaurichthys polylepisHeniochus spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Tu’u’u

Tu’u’u/MamoMutu

Gregories

DamselfishesSergeant-majors Pullers

Pygoplites diacanthusPomacanthus imperatorAbudefdul spp.Amblyglyphidodon leucogasterStegastes spp.Chromis spp.

3 2 2 3 10

Mata’ele’ele Emperors Lethrinus spp. 2 2 2 3 9Lupo <8cm Jacks Carangidae

Seriola rivolianaScomberoidescommersonianus

2 1 2 3 8

Aua 8-12cm Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

2 2 2 2 8

Vete/I’asinaMatulau/AfuluUla’oa

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

3 1

1

2 7

Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 1 2 1 2 6Atule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus

Decapterus spp.1 2 2 1 6

Matala’oa/Taiva Mala’i/Tamala

Black snapper Snappers

Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

1 1 1 3 6

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

2 2 1 1 6

Lalafi Maori wrasse Cheilinus spp. 1 1 0 2 4Ili’ilia <15cm Unicornfish Naso lituatus 2 0 0 2 4Pa’umal Filefishes Amanses spp. 1 0 0 3 4Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthysquadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

1 1 1 1 4

Sal Samoan anchovy Stolephorus apiensis 1 1 1 1 4Pinel (juveniles) Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 2 1 1 0 4Sugale Wrass Halichoeres hartzfeldii

Hemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.

2 0 0 1 3

113

Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodon meleagris

Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus anguillaris 0 1 1 1 3Gatala Groupers/Cods Cephalopholis spp.

Plectropomus leopardus2 0 0 1 3

Sue Puffers/Tobies Canthigaster spp.Arothron spp.

0 2 0 1 3

Tautu Porcupinefish Diodon spp. 0 1 1 1 3Ava’ava Terapon perch Terapon jarbua 1 0 0 1 2Tolo Flatheads Platycephalidae (5spp.) 2 0 0 0 2NofuSausauleleLa’otele

ScorpionfishLionfishReef stonefish

Scorpaenopsis cirrhosaPterois volitansSynanceia verrucosa

1 1 0 0 2

Mumu Ponyfishes

Goldline bream

Leiognathus spp.Gazza minutaGnathodentex aureolineatus

0 1 1 0 2

Igaga? 0 0 2 0 2Tivao

Tivao-sugale

Monocle bream Butterfly bream Whiptail

Scolopsis trilineatusNemipterus sp.Pentapodus sp.

0 0 0 1 1

Moamoa Trunkfishes/Boxfishes

Lactoria cornutaOstracion tuberculatumOstracium lentiginosum

0 1 0 0 1

Maogo White-spottedsurgeonfish

Acanthurus guttatus 1 0 0 0 1

Groups of men and women fishers in the four villages identified at least 32 species or groups of small finfishes that are amongst the most significant and common in their lagoon. The most significant small finfish for selling and subsistence consumption include the surgeonfishes (alogo,pone, manini), groupers/cods (gatala), small parrotfish (fuga), rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo/kiko),squirrelfish and soldierfish (malau/tamalau), emperors (mata’ele’ele), wrasses (sugale, lalafi),unicornfish (ili’ilia/ume), butterflyfish (tifitifi), juvenile mullets ( ua), damselfish/gregories and angelfish (tu’u’u), goatfish (i’asina), scads (atule) and snappers (taiva/mala’i). The small mullets ( ua <8cm), damselfishes/gregories and angelfish (tu’u’u) and Samoan anchovy (sal )are for consumption and not for sale and are usually caught using cast nets.

Other fishes that are consumed in smaller numbers or not so important at these villages are the triggerfish (sumu), puffers (sue), porcupine fish (tautu), scorpionfish (nofu), ponyfishes (mumu)and trunkfishes (moamoa). At Ta’elefaga the igaga fish, as the villagers stated, used to breed in the Ta’elefaga River, appearing at the river mouth once a year is now absent.

114

5.5.1 Fishers Creel Survey and Abundance of Finfishes

Small finfish not only provide the daily intake of Samoan families but are being sold to earn money by selling within the fishers’ own villages, at the market, shops or along the roadside.The fishers’ creel surveys show at least 28 species of finfish caught by fishers at the four study sites (Table 5.6).

Table 5.6: Frequency of finfish catches from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of fishers and total catches of fish in villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

G41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Laea/Fuga Parrotfish Scarus spp. 24/252 1/3 6/46 2/3 33/304 Palani/Alogo/Pone

Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp. 12/67 1/14 12/86 2/118 27/265

Tu’u’u, Mutu Gregories, Sergeants

Abudefdul spp.Stegastes spp.

8/208 0/0 0/0 1/3 9/211

Anae/Aua Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

5/22 2/21 4/74 2/22 13/139

Ata’ata/Gatala Groupers/Cods Epinephelus spp.Cephalopholis spp.Plectropomusleopardus

12/49 1/3 4/10 2/4 19/66

Malatea/Lalafi/Sugale

Maori wrass Wrasse

Cheilinus spp.Halichoeres hartzfeldiiHemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodonmeleagris

11/53 0 1/3 1/3 13/59

Malava/KikoPa’u’ulu/Lo

Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 8/26 0 5/14 3/14 16/54

Malau/Tamalau Squirrelfish

Soldierfish

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

13/40 0 1/8 2/3 16/51

Manini Convictsurgeonfish

Acanthurus triostegus 13/40 1/1 4/6 1/1 19/48

Moana/Vete/I’asina

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

9/25 0 5/21 1/1 15/47

115

Filoa/Mata’ele’ele

Emperors Lethrinus spp. 7/11 0 6/21 2/13 15/45

Ume/Ili’ilia Unicornfish Naso spp. 5/19 0 1/16 1/3 7/38 Tifitifi Butterflyfish Chaetodon spp.

Forcipiger spp.HemitaurichthyspolylepisHeniochus spp.

9/25 0 0 1/3 10/28

Mala’i/Taiva/Tamala

Snappers Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

4/13 0 1/11 0 5/24

Laulaufau/Pe’ape’a

Moorish Idol Zanclus cornutus 5/12 0 0 0 5/12

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

2/3 1/1 2/4 2/2 7/10

Sapoanae/Malauli/Lupo

Trevallies/Jacks CarangidaeSeriola rivolianaScomberoidescommersonianus

1/4 0 1/3 0 2/7

Tautu Porcupine Diodon spp. 1/1 0 1/1 1/4 3/6Sal Samoan achovy Stolephorus apiensis 0 0 0 1/5 1/5 Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 0 1/4 1/1 0 2/5Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatus 1/3 0 0 0 1/3Ume aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptus 1/1 0 1/1 0 2/2Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthysquadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

0 0 0 2/2 2/2

Atule Purse-eye scad SelarcrumenophthalmusDecapterus spp.

0 0 0 1/2 1/2

Ali Flounder Samariscus triocellatus 0 1/1 0 1/1 2/2 A’u/Ise Longtom Platybelone argalus

platyura0 1/1 0 0 1/1

Ganue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp. 1/1 0 0 0 1/1Mumu Ponyfish Leiognathus spp.

Gazza minuta0 0 0 1/1 1/1

Nofu Scorpionfish Scorpaenopsis cirrhosa 1/1 0 0 0 1/1

The parrotfish (laea, fuga) is the most commonly caught finfish mainly at Gagaifo where the high number of fishers were the night diving/spearing fishers. Gregories (tu’u’u) are also abundant at Gagaifo whilst mullets (anae, ua) are in good supply at all villages, which were mainly caught using cast and gillnets.

116

The surgeonfish, Acanthurus lineatus (alogo) and Ctenochaetus striatus (pone) are the most common finfish found at Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Vailele Villages. The supply of these is adequate, but not abundant as it used to be. Similarly the squirrelfish, Myripristis spp. (malau)and Sargocentron spp. (tamalau) are abundant, particularly at Gagaifo and Vailele, but the fish are considerably smaller in size than in the past.

Other common small finfish in good supply at the research areas include rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo);jack (lupo); convict surgeonfish (manini); silver biddy (matu) and damselfish (mutu) that are caught mainly by cast nets. Finfish like the Moorish idol (laulaufau), snappers (taiva),butterflyfish (tifitifi) are in good supply but the moonfish (koko), flounder (ali), Samoan anchovy (sal ), herring (pelupelu) are low in supply and were not caught by all fishers or at all of the study villages.

The finfishes caught by fishers were usually less than ten per individuals catch. The only species that were in ample numbers per catch and caught in abundance of more than nine or ten in numbers particularly during night diving and spearing were smaller parrotfishes (fuga), convict surgeonfish (manini) and other surgeonfishes (alogo, pone), whilst high number of gregories/damselfishes (tu’u’u) were caught by diving/spearing in daytime and juvenile mullets ( ua) by cast nets.

The gregories/damselfishes (tu’u’u) and the parrotfish (fuga) were the only two types of which the number caught was more than thirty, while surgeonfish (alogo, pone, manini) juvenile mullets ( ua), goatfish (vete), rabbitfishes (pa’u’ulu/lo), butterfly fish (tifitifi) and groupers (gatala) were caught in numbers of twenty and below. Most of the other species for example snappers (mala’i), emperors (mata’ele’ele), wrasses (sugale), unicornfish (ili’ilia) and others were caught in lower numbers (below 10 per catch).

Small finfish have been over-fished, especially in terms of taking the undersized species, and this has led to the decline and rarity of many types of fish in the study areas (Table 5.7).

117

Table 5.7: Frequency with which specified large nearshore finfish species are listed as being rare, declining and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note:1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Small finfish Abundance Rare (r), declining (d) & depleted (dp)

Total

Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Atule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus 1r 2dp 1d 4Pinel <4cm Rabbitfish Siganus spp. 1d 1r 1r 3Vete/Afulu Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp. 1d 1d 2 Lupo Jack Carangidae (<8cm) 2d 2 Tu’u’u Gregorys Stegastes spp. 2r 2 Pala’ia(<4cm)

Brittle-toothedsurgeonfish

Ctenochaetus striatus 1d 1d 2

Igaga/k k ?<4cm 2dp 2Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus lineatus 1d 1Mat lau Goatfish Parupeneus spp. 1d 1Ili’ilia Unicornfish Naso lituarus 1d 1Mumu Common Ponyfish Leiognsthus equula 1d 1Pelupelu Herring Sardinella albella 1r 1Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyena 1d 1

Many important small finfish and other organisms (Figures 5.6a–g) are still available at Gagaifo and Vailele Villages, while the amount has declined in Fagaloa Bay. In Table 5.7 the fishers identified small finfishes that had reportedly declined, become rare or depleted from their villages.The people of Fagaloa district refer to the purse-eye scad (atule) as Ta’elefaga’s fish. In previous years the schools of atule fish appeared at the head of Fagaloa Bay annually, where Ta’elefaga is located, and the whole village community of men, women and children participated in catching schools of atule. Currently the villagers of Ta’elefaga and neighbouring Ma’asina claim that this finfish is rare or could be depleted from their lagoon.

In the late 1990s, after the establishment of the power station in Ta’elefaga, the atule was appearing at two or three year interval instead of annually. But in the last five years this fish has not appeared at all, leading to the claim that it is now absent from Ta’elefaga. At Vailele the purse-eye scad exists but has declined near the shore where cast nets used to catch it.

118

Figures 5.6a–g: Some important small finfishes, eels and sharks caught at the study villages

5.6 Molluscs

a) Gagaifo: sergeants, juvenile mullets, rabbitfish & goatfish caught by castnet

b) Vailele: flounder caught by spearing - ali

e) Ta’elefaga night catch: grouper,wrasse, convict surgeonfish & lobsters

c) Gagaifo: moray eels caught by night fishers - pusi

g) Vailele: black-tip shark caught by gillnet - malie

f) Ta’elefaga night diving/ spearing fisher beyond the reef: surgeonfish, goatfish, rabbitfish

d) Gagaifo night catch by diving/spearing: surgeonfish, squirrelfish, parrotfish, rabbitfish, moray eels etc.

The unicornfish, Naso lituarus (ili’ilia) has declined in the lagoon of Gagaifo while herring, Sardinella albella (pelupelu) and angelfish/damselfish (tu’u’u) are rare at Vailele. The unicornfish which villagers cook or consume raw is a sought after fish for both consumption and sale. As stated by fishers at Gagaifo, this species is over-fished especially by night fishers, and it has declined rapidly because they even catch the undersized fish. The gregories and damselfishes (tu’u’u) have declined at Vailele due to destructive techniques used by women in previous years to fish this type of finfish.

The schools of juvenile bristtle-toothed surgeonfish (pala’ia) that used to be seen often at Gagaifo and Vailele hardly appears annually nowadays. Similarly, the schools of juvenile

119

rabbitfish (pinel ) that used to appear annually at Ta’elefaga and Vailele have declined or is seen once in every two or three years. The igaga juvenile fish that breeds in the Ta’elefaga River, which was formerly caught by the villagers at the Ta’elefaga River mouth, is now absent according to respondents. The silver biddy (matu) and the small jacks (lupo) that used to be caught by hook and line at Vailele have declined and are hardly caught using this method of fishing on the shore or lagoon though some are still taken near or on the reefs by using cast nets

At Ma’asina apart from the rare or depleted purse-eye scad (atule) other small finfish such as the eel catfish, Plotosus lineatus (apoa), goatfishes, Mulloidichthys flavolineatus, Mulloidichthyssamoensis (vete) and Parupeneus trifasciatus, P. multifasciatus (matulau) as well as the ponyfish, Leiognsthus equula (mumu) have declined.

According to many fishers the sizes of many finfish are getting smaller and many fishers’ fish even undersized specimens especially unicornfish (ili’ilia) at Gagaifo and surgeonfish at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The juvenile mullets ( ua), rabbitfish (pa’u’ulu/lo), anchovies (sal ),purse-eye scads (atule) and goatfish (vete/i’asina) are the species caught by cast nets on the shore particularly the undersized juvenile mullets, rabbitfish and purse-eye scads.

5.6 RAYS, SHARKS, MORAY EELS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE

Rays and sharks are vital species but not fished much at the study villages and the social groups identified rays and sharks found and sometimes seen mainly near and beyond the reefs (Table 5.8).

120

Table 5.8: Frequency with which specified species of sharks, rays and moray eels are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sharks and rays present at the study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

SharksGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Moemoeao/Miliga

Black-tip reef sharks Nabrius ferrugineus 3 2 1 3 9

Mataitaliga Scalloped Hammerhead Sphyrna lewini 2 2 1 5 Ta’aneva Spotted nurse shark Stegostoma fasciatum 1 1Aso Mackerel shark Isurus oxyrinchus 1 1Rays Fai pe’a Spotted eagle ray Aetobatis narinari 3 2 2 3 10Fai pala? Coachwhip stingray Himantura fai? 2 2 2 3 9Fai malie Manta ray Manta birostris 1 1 3 5Fai gatae? 1 1 1 2 5Fai tala Blue spot Stingray Dasyatis kuhlii 1 1 2Moray eels & snakesAiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 3 2 2 3 10Pusi gatala/ Maoa’e

Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicus 3 2 2 3 10

Onea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinus 3 2 2 3 10Tafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax

flavimarginatus3 2 1 3 9

I’aui Conger eel Conger cinereus 2 2 3 7Auvaeloloa Moray eel Enchelycore

schismatorhynchus2 1 3

Gatamea Snake eels Myrichthus spp. 1 1 2 Gata sami/ Galio

Sea snake Pelamis platurus 3 2 2 3 10

Soloalalo Sea snake Laticauda 2 3 5

Rays are rare at all villages and none were observed or caught by fishers during the time of the fieldwork. The untitled men respondents at Gagaifo stated that rays are occasionally seen but some of them lack the skill to fish this species.

The scalloped hammerhead shark (mata’italiga) and mackerel shark (aso) are rare at these villages. Some fishers at Gagaifo and Vailele caught a few small black-tip reef sharks (malie) by gill nets. A turtle was seen once when snorkelling in the lagoon of Gagaifo during a rough high tide. The fishers’ creel survey caught only a few moray eels and sharks (Table 5.9).

121

Table 5.9: Frequency of sharks and moray eels from the fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of sharks and moray eels, and fishers total catches in the study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

SharksG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Moemoeao/Miliga

Black-tip reef sharks

Nabrius ferrugineus 1/1 1/1 2/2

Moray eels Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 1/1 1/10 2/11Pusi gatala/ Maoa’e

Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicus 2/2 1/10 3/12

Onea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinus 1/1 1/10 2/10

The two fishers at Gagaifo and Vailele caught one black-tip reef sharks each (malie) (Figure 5.6g) by gill nets near the reef and none were caught at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina.

The moray eels are still in good supply particularly at Gagaifo and Vailele, however not many fishers laid out traps during the time of the fieldwork. The starry moray eel (aiaiuga), the giant moray eel (pusi gatala) and the eel snake (onea) were the common types caught by the few fishers using eel traps and night diving/spearing fishers at Gagaifo. The villages of Gagaifo and Vailele usually lay out eel traps overnight during the weekend for meals on Sundays. The conger eel (i’aui) are not eaten in these villages, nor are sea snakes. None of these species were seen at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina where there was less fishing activities taking place during the time of the fieldwork.

5.7 MOLLUSCS

Molluscs are vital seafood for consumption and earning income, for example at Vailele, where seafoods are sold along the roadside. Both female and male fishers listed a variety of molluscs found and considered important in their villages (Table 5.10).

122

Table 5.10: Frequency with which specified molluscs species are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Women groups listed more shellfishes than men; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Molluscs present at Study villages – Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Large shellfish Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Faisua Clam Tridacna spp. 3 2 2 3 10Foafoa/Saosao? Triton trumpet shell Charonia tritonis 1 1 1 1 4Pala’au Spider conch shells Lambis spp. 1 1 1 3Small shellfish PipiPipi-tu

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

3 2 2 3 10

Sisi Freshwater andnerite snails

Neritina and Nerita spp. 3 2 2 3 10

Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 3 2 1 3 9Aliao Top shell Tectus pyramis 3 2 1 2 8Fole Pen shells Pinna spp. 2 1 2 3 8Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 1 2 3 6Pule Tiger cowry

CowryCypraea tigrisCypraea spp.

3 2 1 6

Pae Ark shell Anadara sp. 1 1 1 2 5Tapula’a Turban Turbo sp. 3 2 5 Fatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus spp. 1 2 1 4 Li Surf clam Atactodea striata 2 2 4Matapisu Limpets Patelloida sp., Cellana sp. 1 2 3 Tio Rock oyster Crassostrea mordax 1 2 3Asi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp. 1 1 2 Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulus 1 1 2Asi’asi Scallop shell Pectinidae 1 1 2Tifa Black-lip pearl oyster Pinctada margaritifera 1 1Patupatu Vase shell Vasidae 1 1 U’u Brown mussel Modiolus sp. 1 1Sea hares and Sea slugsGau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 3 2 2 3 10Gaupapa Sea slug Onchidium 3 3 Matefanau Sea hare Aplysia sp. 1 1 2Octopus and SquidsFe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Gufe’e Cuttlefish Sepia sp. 3 2 2 2 9

5.7.1 Large and Small Shellfishes

Large and small shellfishes (Figures 5.7 a–f) are important in the study villages, particularly for local consumption. Large species are uncommon at the study villages, mainly giant clams, which

123

have been over-havested and have declined or become rare in many villages in Samoa. The large shellfishes identified in all villages are the trumpet shell (foafoa), spider shells (pala’au)and importantly the giant clams (faisua). Giant clams were normally found on and beyond the reef while trumpet and spiders shells are now rarely found on reefs but occasionally exist beyond the reefs.

Figures 5.7a–f: Some of the important shellfishes at the study villages

a)Ta’elefaga: the rare venus shell - tugane

b) Gagaifo: turbo, top shell with sea cucumbers - aliao

f) Vailele: pen shell - fole

c) Gagaifo: abundant Violetasaphis - pipi

e) Gagaifo: giant clam - faisuad) Gagaifo: turbo and tiger cowry - alili, pule

The trumpet triton and spider conch were usually fished in previous years for their traditional significance, like using them as trumpets (foafoa) to call village council meetings and other occasions. These shellfishes have also been sold for handicraft decorations or as tourist souvenirs however today these shellfishes are rarely found. The giant clams – Tridacna spp.(faisua) are still found, but have been over-harvested.

Of small shellfishes, the respondents identified at least 18 species that are amongst the most important for selling and consumption. The most important shellfish for sale and consumption are the top shells (ali’ao), turban shells (alili), venus clams (tugane) and pen shells (fole). The asaphis (pipi) is the most commonly gathered shellfish at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga, but only for consumption.

124

Village children collect cowries, Cypraea tigris and Cypraea spp. (pule); thorny oyster (fatu ua);rock oyster (tio); small surf clams (li) and nerite snails (sisi). The other shellfishes like vase shells (patupatu); limpets (matapisu); ark shells (pae) and scallop shells (asi’asi) are generally found at Vailele and reported as naturally rare at other villages.

5.7.2 Creel Survey and Abundance of Molluscs

The lagoons of Vailele and Gagaifo are much wider compared to those of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina Villages. Vailele has a greater variety of seafood compared to Gagaifo and similarly, Ta’elefaga used to have a wide varieties of marine organisms like Vailele, but most have declined or disappeared after the establishment of the hydro power station there. Large shellfishes have declined dramatically with some small shellfishes mainly at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina such as the turbo, top shell, venus clams and the depleted pen shells (Table 5.11).

Table 5.11: Frequency with which specified species of mollucss are known and listed as declined, rare and depleted in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Molluscs frequency Rare (r), Declined (d) & Depleted (dp) (x/10)

Total

X10

ShellfishGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Faisua Clam Tridacna spp. 2d 2r 2r 1d 7Fole Pen shells Pinna sp. 1dp 2dp 3Aliao Top shell Tectus pyramis 1d 1r 1d 1d 3Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 1d 2r 3Foafoa/Pu Trumpet shell Charonia tritonis 1r 1r 2Pala’au Spider shells Lambis lambis 1d 1d 2Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 1d 1r 1r 1d 2Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulus 1d 1Asi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp. 1d 1Sea hares Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 2dp 2dp 4Octopus & Squids Fe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp. 2r 1r

1d2d 6

Gufe’e Reef squid Sepioteuthislessoniana

1d 1d 2

125

According to the respondents in all villages the trumpet shells (foafoa) and spider shells (pala’au) were naturally low in supply in nearshore areas and are even hard to find nowadays beyond the reef.

Reef gleaning for particular shellfish was intense in the 1970s to the 1990s particularly the giant clams that became scarce throughout Upolu and Savai’i Islands due to over-fishing. For example, the giant clams declined at Gagaifo and Vailele while they became rare at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Currently, giant clams have just started to recover at Gagaifo and fishers claimed that it may attributed to less gleaning activities by women fishers on the reef in the last ten years or so.

In addition to over-harvesting of giant clams, important small shellfish like the top shell (ali’ao)and the turban shells (alili) have declined at Gagaifo and Vailele and have nearly disappeared from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina due to over-harvesting that is now coupled with high sedimentation. These species according to fishers are mainly gathered at nighttime during low tides in full moon (po masina) as they are hardly found in daytime. Apart from over-fishing reef degradation has increased the problem especially when rubble banks covered much of Vailele and Ma’asina reefs after the cyclones in the early 1990s. These species had declined from Gagaifo because of intense over-harvesting in previous years mainly by night fishers.

Many small shellfishes are naturally rare at Gagaifo, such as the littleneck clam, Tapes literata(asi’asi), black-lip pearl oyster, (tifa), arc shell, Arcidae (asi), olive shells, (panea) and the thorny oyster (fatu ua).

According to fishers creel surveys at the four villages (Table 5.12) only a few species of shellfish have been harvested or found by fishers during the fieldwork.

126

Table 5.12: Frequency of molluscs from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) i = individual, b = individuals in bottle, m = mixed bottle of sea cucumbers, gonads and sea hares; 3) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of molluscs and total catches in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

ShellfishG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Faisua Giant clams Tridacna spp. 2/4 1/1 0 2/3 5/8iPipiPipit

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

4/136 0 1/2 1/4 6/142i

Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp. 2/13 2/13Sisi Nerite snails Nerita spp. 1/4 1/7 2/11Fole Pen shells Pinna spp. 5/2b

7/8m 12/10Pule Tiger cowry Cypraea tigris 1/2 1/2 Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomus 1/2 1/2Aliao Top shells Tectus pyramis 1/1 1/1 Sea hares & Sea slugs Gau Green sea hare Dolabella auricularia 8/31i

1/2b11/9m

8/31

12/11Gaupapa/ta’iafo?

Sea slug Onchidium 2/2i 2/2

Octopus Fe’e Octopus Octopus sp. 3/4 4/7 7/11

The villages of Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina have less activities of reef gleaning because of less species available. The giant clam is still the important large shellfish but it is uncommon and rare especially at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina and only five out of the total 108 fishers gathered giant clams at Gagaifo, Ma’asina and Vailele. The violet asaphis (pipi) is the main shellfish being gathered by women and children of Gagaifo. The few top and turban shells gathered were from the reef at Gagaifo Village at night time and none were collected at other sites.

The venus clam (tugane) that was important and common in Ta’elefaga still exists, but has become rare even in the mangrove estuary on the west end of the village. Some reports like the environmental impact assessment (EIA) done at Fagaloa recorded that this shellfish has been eradicated from Ta’elefaga; however, during this research the children and researcher collected venus clams, though not in high quantity. Many adults stated that this shellfish is depleted, as it is hardly collected nowadays because the villagers avoid consuming small shellfish on the shore and the degraded discolored lagoon.

127

Apart from the dirty discoloured lagoon, the rapid deposition of sediment from the Ta’elefagaRiver due to discharge wastewater from the hydroelectric power station and silt runoff from the small creek at the mangrove community contribute to the rarity of venus clam (tugane).

The pen shell, Pinna sp. (fole) is highly available at Vailele as it grows in seagrass beds that cover much of the lagoon. The pen shell used to be abundantly available at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina but now disappeared after the establishment of the power station. This is obvious at these Fagaloa Villages, especially at Ta’elefaga, where the lagoon is now quite bare and almost entirely covered with silt/sediments and brown seagrasses. Other species less important and fished mainly by children are the turbo, Turbo sp. (tapula’a), tiger cowry (pule), and nerite snails (sisi) mainly at Gagaifo and Vailele.

The high percentage of pen shells was recorded only from Vailele as it is not found at Gagaifo and had disappeared from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The venus clam (tugane) was uncommon and not gathered much at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina because of its scarcity. Some night fishers at Gagaifo found a few top shells, turban snails and violet asaphis (pipi), which were frequently dug up by women and children.

The green sea hare, Dollabella auricularia (gau) is still present and is an important seafood at Vailele for consumption and sale. Even though the green sea hare is still in good supply at Vailele the fishers said it is not as abundant as it was before, as a result of over- harvesting.

Like the pen shell the green sea hare (gau) has been eradicated from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina according to respondents in Table 5.11, because of high sedimentation and unclean lagoon as a result of the power station at Ta’elefaga. The sea hare is naturally rare at Gagaifo whereas the sea slug, Onchidium (gaupapa) is common on volcanic rocks that extend further from shore outwards into the lagoon. The sea hare catch was only from Vailele and this was for consumption and selling along the roadside.

The octopus, Octopus sp. (fe’e) is adequate in supply (Table 5.11) at Gagaifo and Vailele but not as abundant as they used to be in previous years because of over-fishing for consumption.

128

The reef squid, Sepioteuthis lessoniana (gufe’e) has declined due to over-harvesting mainly forbait used in moray eels traps. Some fishers at Vailele and Gagaifo caught octopus and none were caught at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina during the time of the fieldwork.

5.8 SEA CUCUMBERS, SEA URCHINS AND SEA STARS

Sea cucumbers and sea urchins are significant to the local people’s diet. Most sea cucumbers are available at Vailele and Gagaifo with their clear waters while they have declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina as less numbers of these were seen while diving at these areas (Table 5.13).

Table 5.13: Frequency with which specified species of sea-cucumbers, sea-urchins and sea-stars are known and listed in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Women groups listed more sea-cucumbers and sea-urchins than men; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sea cucumbers present atthe study villages Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

Sea-cucumberGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 x/10

Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 3 2 2 3 10Loli Lollyfish

Blackfish Holothuria atraActinopyga miliaris

3 2 2 3 10

Greenfish Maisu Stichopus chloronatus 3 2 2 3 10Mama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga mauritiana

Actinopyga echinites3 1 2 3 9

Neti Curryfish Stichopus variegates 2 2 1 2 7Sea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulis 2 2 1 2 7Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 2 2 3 7Peva synaptid Synapta maculata 2 1 1 2 6Ulutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argus 1 1 1 2 5Sea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaei 3 2 2 3 10Vaga Long spine urchin Diadema setosum 3 2 2 3 10Sava’e/Satula Short-spine sea

urchinTripneustes gratilla 3 2 2 3 10

Ofaofa Heart urchin Brissus latecarinatus? 2 2 2 6Sea Stars Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigata 3 2 2 3 10Aveau (fa’aatualoa) Serpent star Ophiocoma sp. 3 1 1 2 7Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicus 2 1 3 6Alamea Crown of thorn Acanthaster planci 3 1 1 2 6Palutu Pincushion star Culcita granulatus 2 1 1 1 4

129

The results show that the black lollyfish (loli), brown sand fish (fugafuga) and the surf redfish

(mama’o) are found in all villages. These are also the main sea cucumbers fished by women and children for family consumption and earning cash for some families at Vailele.

Pricklyfish, Stichopus horrens (sea mao’i) gonads are the most important and expensive product from sea cucumbers, but found only at Vailele. The pricklyfish is naturally rare at Gagaifo and had disappeared from Ta'elefaga and Ma'asina Villages. The pinkfish, Holothuria edulis (seaamu’u) is in good abundance but hardly eaten. Some of these species discussed were seen at these villages as shown in Figures 5.8a-f.

Figures 5.8a-f: Some important sea cucumbers and other marine species at the study villages

a)Vailele kid with octopus – fe’e

f) Vailele: pricklyfish with gonads - sea mao'i

b) Gagaifo: lollyfish, loli & crown-of-thorns starfish

d) Gagaifo: sandfish & surf red sea cucumbers - fugafuga,mama’o

c) Vailele: Cleaning sea hare, gau

e) Gagaifo: sea amu’u on the reef

The four sea urchin species listed (Table 5.13) are the only known species found at the study villages except for the heart urchin, Brissus latecarinatus? (ofaofa) that is absent from Ta’elefaga. The boring sea urchin (tuitui), the long spine urchin (vaga) and the short spine urchin (sava’e/satula) are the most important for consumption at all villages and are fished mainly by women and children. This is supported by the results of the creel surveys (Table 5.14) that show that sea urchins and sea cucumbers are very important at Vailele.

130

Table 5.14: Frequency of sea cucumbers and sea urchins from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) i = individuals (not cleanse), b = 1 particular species in bottle, m = bottle of mixed sea cucumbers with gonads, pen shells and sea hares, s = sack of boring urchins; 3) 41/x, 6/x, 17/x, 44/x = number of fishers and their catches at the study villages and 108/x = Total number of fishers and their catches.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of sea cucumbers and sea urchins and fishers total catches in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals

# fisher /catch

Sea cucumber G41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 1/1w 1/2w 1/1i11/10b24/20m

1/1

35/30Loli Lollyfish Holothuria atra 1/1b 18/10m 18/10 Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 1/4i

4/2m1/44/2

Mama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga spp. 1/1w 2/12i 2/12 Sea urchins Tuitui Boring sea urchin Echinometra matthaei 1/12

6/5s1/126/5s

Vaga Long spined urchin

Diadema setosum 1/51/18 2/23

The most gathered sea cucumbers during the fieldwork were the sand fish (fugafuga), surf redfish (mama’o) and lollyfish (loli). These abundant species are commercially important at Vailele and only for consumption at Gagaifo, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Women fishers of Vailele cleanse, cut in pieces and bottled various sea cucumbers – fugafuga, mama'o, loli, sea mao’i(pricklyfish gonads) and mix them with sea hare (gau) and pen shells (fole) to sell along the roadside to the villagers and passing traffic. A few lollyfish and brown sandfish were seen at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga and none were collected at Ta’elefaga while at Ma’asina only one fisher found two brown sandfish.

The boring sea urchin (tuitui) is significant at Vailele not only for consumption but also for sale. Women and children gather sea uchins from the reef using empty rice sacks. Baskets of sea urchins are commonly sold at Vailele Village, which is the stopping site on the east coast of Upolu for passing traffic to buy sea urchins.

The long spine urchins (vaga) were gathered but only for consumption. During the research, sea urchins were seen in smaller quantity at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina but there were no fishers

131

gathering sea urchins at these villages at the time. At Gagaifo, sea urchins are highly abundant but only for consumption, and none were gathered during the fieldwork.

5.8.1 Abundance of Sea cucumbers, Urchins and Sea Stars

The questionnaires surveys indicate that all the common types of sea cucumbers have declined at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga Villages while they are still in good supply in the clean clear lagoons of Gagaifo and Vailele (Table 5.15).

Table 5.15: Frequency with which specified species of sea cucumbers, sea urchins and sea stars are known and listed as declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele; 2) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Sea cucumbers, urchins and stars supply Declined (d), Rare(r) and Depleted (dp) x10

Total

x/10

Sea-cucumberGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Sea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrens 2r 2r 4Sea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulis 2d 1r 3Fugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorata 1d 1d 2 Neti Curryfish Stichopus variegates 1r 1r 2 Ulutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argus 1d 1Maisu Greenfish Stichopus chloronatusPeva Synaptid Synapta maculateSea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaei 1d

1r2r 4

Sava’e/Satula Short-spine sea urchin Tripneustes gratilla 1r 1r 2Sea Stars Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicus 1r 1r 2Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigata 1d 1Alamea Crown of thorns starfish Acanthaster planci 1d 1d 1d 1

Of the species in Table 5.15 the curryfish (neti) and the leopardfish, (ulutunu) are uncommon and the inedible Synapta maculata (peva) and greenfish, Stichopus chloronatus (maisu) are still in good supply at the study villages. Fishers at Gagaifo explained that the greenfish was commercially fished at one time in the past when a company used to collect and buy this species from the local fishers and exported overseas. The pricklyfish (sea) and curryfish (neti) was naturally uncommon at Gagaifo while other species of sea cucumbers are abundant.

132

Although it seems that all the sea cucumbers listed are in good supply at Vailele, they are not as plentiful as they used to be due to over-fishing for subsistence and commercial uses. Furthermore, the cyclones in 1990 and 1991 covered much of the reef with rubble Island banks and the prickly fish (sea) have decreased. However, the pricklyfish gonads are the only edible parts of the pricklyfish and this has made it possible for this seafood to regenerate but their sizes are getting smaller because of high and rapid subsistence and commercial use.

The sea urchins like the long spined urchin (vaga) is still in good supply at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, whereas the boring sea urchin (tuitui) and the short spined urchin (sava’e) have become rare nowadays (Figures 5.9 f and g). The boring sea urchin was also reported in previous studies as being eradicated from Fagaloa Bay however the boring urchin was seen even though in low quantity during snorkelling observations. The small sized heart sea urchin, Brissuslatecarinatus? (ofaofa) found in sandy areas nearshore and which children and women usually dig for is uncommon and not gathered in the research areas.

Sea stars in Table 5.13 are not edible but they are significant marine organisms found throughout Samoa (Fig 5.9 a-d). Their quantity is also low at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The blue starfish, Linckia laevigata (aveau moana) is highly available in the clean waters of Vailele and Gagaifo. The white starfish, Archaster typicus (aveau aloalo) is naturally rare at Gagaifo, abundant at Vailele but now rare at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga. The pincushion star, Culcita granulatus(palutu) was commonly seen in the lagoons of Vailele and Gagaifo.

The crown-of-thorns starfish (Figure 5.9e), Acanthaster planci (alamea) was widespread in the 1970s to the early 1990s mainly at Gagaifo and Vailele, compared to Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. It is still present at Vailele and Gagaifo but their numbers have declined, and none were seen at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina where sedimentation is high and corals are degraded.

5.9 JELLYFISH, SEA ANEMONE, SEAWEEDS, SEA WORMS AND ABUNDANCE

There are many other marine species that make up the local people’s diet, some of which are found at the research areas. For example sea anemone, seaweeds and sea worms as listed by the groups of fishers (Table 5.16).

133

Table 5.16: Frequency with which specified species of jellyfish, sea-anemone, seaweeds and sea worms are known and listed in a sample survey on 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Species present at study villages Questionnaire Frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

JellyfishGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Alualu Upside-down jellyfish Casseopea sp. 2 1 1 3 7Sea anemone Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp. 3 2 2 2 9Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp. 3 1 2 2 8Seaweeds Limu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvillei 3 2 2 3 10Limu fuafua Seaweed/sea grape Caulerpa racemosa 3 1 1 3 8Sea worms Atoaloa sami Giant bristle worm Eunice sp. 2 2 1 2 7Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridis 3 3Moloasi Boring peanut worm? 2 1 3Ipo Peanut worm Siphonosomaaustrale 1 1 2

The jellyfish is naturally uncommon at study villages except when the sea is rough, and some tend to wash onto their shores. Sea anemone (matalelei, lumane) is eaten but not commercially important to the villages of Ma’asina, Ta’elefaga and Vailele, though in Gagaifo some families gather sea anemone and sell it in their village or at the market in Apia (Figure 5.9 i and j). At Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina sea anemone is rare or near depletion from these villages, as is also the case with seaweeds, shellfishes and other species.

The sea grape, (limu fuafua) is naturally rare at the study sites whilst the red seaweed (limua’au) is available on the reefs of these four villages (Figure 5.9h). These seaweeds are both consumed but not commercially important at the study sites. The red seaweed is consumed after it is cooked and it was only at Vailele that about three fishers’ collected this seafood during the fieldwork for consumption (Figure 5.17). The groups’ questionnaires identified some species that have declined and become rare at the study villages (Table 5.17).

134

Table 5.17: Frequency with which specified species of sea-anemone, seaweeds and sea worms are known and listed have declined, become rare and depleted in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

SamoanName

Common Name Scientific Name Sea anemone, moray eels, seaweeds & sea worms supply - Declined, Rare & Depleted (dp)

Total

Sea anemone Gx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3 X/10

Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp. 2r 1r1dp

1d 4

Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp. 1r 2 3SeaweedsLimu fuafua Seaweed Caulerpa racemosa 1dp 1dp 2r

1dp5

Limu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvillei 1d 1r 1d 2Moray eels Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosa 1d 1d 1Tafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax

flavimarginatus1d 1d 1

Sea worms Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridis 1d 1

According to the fishers’ creel surveys the sea anemone (matalelei) was among the occasionally gathered species with five fishers that collected a total of 10 baskets of sea anemone during the two and half weeks of the fieldstudy at Gagaifo. These fishers at Gagaifo Village cooked sea anemone and sold at the market in Apia Town. During the creel survey only about three fishers gathered the limu a’au for consumption at Vailele.

The peanut worm, Siphonosoma australe (ipo) was found only at Ta’elefaga, where a mangrove community exists, but it is uncommon and not gathered by the villagers. The palolo worm, Eunice viridis (palolo), a delicacy that rises twice a year in the months of October and November is found only at Gagaifo and the neighbouring village of Matautu in the Lefaga District and is naturally absent from Vailele, Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga.

In the mid-to late 1990s this delicacy disappeared for nearly five years from Gagaifo and it is only just recently that the palolo risings started to recur but in less quantity.

135

The respondents suggested that the palolo disappeared as a result of coral destruction from fishing activities like the use of fish poison, commercial activities in exporting corals and the impact of the crown-of-thorns starfish.

Other worms are inedible and not commercially significant. For example, the boring peanut worm (moloasi) as stated by the fishers at Gagaifo to be found at sites where asaphis shellfish (pipi)are dig up usually by women and children. The brittle sea worms are also present at all these sites, especially Vailele Village where it is common. Some of these species as discussed above were seen during the fieldwork (Figures 5.9a-l).

Figures 5.9a–l: Other important marine species at the study villages

5.9.1 Crustaceans and abundance

f) Ma’asina: long spined urchin - vaga

i) Gagaifo: boiling sea anemone - matalelei

h) Vailele: Halymenia seaweed - limu a’au

b) Vailele: white starfish – aveau aloalo

c) Vailele: brittle starfish a) Blue star - aveau

l) Gagaifo: edible sea slug – Onchidiumgaupapa/ta’iafo? k) Vailele: brittle

worm - atoaloasami

g) Vailele: boring sea urchin - tuitui

d) Vailele: pin cushion star

e) Gagaifo: crown-of-thorns starfish-alamea

j) Gagaifo: picking sea anemone from coralafter boiling

136

5.10 CRUSTACEANS AND THEIR ABUNDANCE

Crabs and lobsters are vital species providing food for special occasions for selling and family meals. The interviewed groups listed a variety of crustaceans found at their villages (Table 5.18) but not all of these were caught during the fieldwork.

Table 5.18: Frequency with which specified crustacean species are known and listed by fishers in a sample survey of 10 groups of men and women in four villages of Upolu Island, Samoa during July to August 2004 (Note: 1) G = Gaigaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele 2) Some groups listed more than others; 3) x/3, x/2 = number of questionnaires per village and x/10 = total number of questionnaires in the four study villages.

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Crustaceans present at the study villages. Questionnaire frequency (x/10)

Total

X/10

CrabsGx/3

Mx/2

Tx/2

Vx/3

Amaama Grapsid crab Grapsus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrata 3 2 2 3 10Tutu/kuku Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatus 3 2 2 3 10Vaevaeuli Black-claw reef

crabEtisus sp.? 2 2 2 3 9

Tupa Land/Beach crab Cardisoma carnifex 2 2 3 7Matamea Red-eye crab Eriphia sebana 3 1 1 1 6U’a Red-claw land crab Sesarma erythrodactyla 1 2 1 4Avi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda ceratophthalmus 2 1 1 3 7Tupu-o-pa’a? 3 3 Pa’atala Spiny swimmer

crabThalamita sp.

1 1 2

Tapola Burrowing crab Calappa sp. 1 1 2 Coconut crab Birgus latro 1 1 2

Sa’esa’e Poisonous shawl crab

Zozymus? 1 1

Ataula Fiddler crab Uca sp.Lobsters Ula Spiny lobsters Panulirus penicillatus

Panulirus sp.Panulirus versicolor

3 2 2 3 10

Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp. 3 2 2 3 10Ulavai Freshwater shrimp Macrobrachium lar

Palaemon sp.1 1 2

The important crabs included the red spotted crabs (k k ) mainly caught by night fishers from Gagaifo and a few from Ta’elefaga and Vailele. A few mangrove crabs (pa’alimago) were caught using fixed gill nets at Ta’elefaga. The mangrove crab (pa’alimago) found at Ta’elefaga is naturally absent from Gagaifo and rare at Ma’asina and Vailele.

137

Mangrove crabs has now declined at Ta'elefaga due to over-harvesting by fishers using gill nets to trap crabs at the mangrove estuary.

The spiny lobsters (ula), slipper lobsters (papata) and the crabs — red spotted crab (k k ) and the black claw reef crab (vaevaeuli) — are considered the most vital and are present at all these villages, on and beyond the reef. Other edible species but are less consumed at these villages include the beach crab (tupa), grapsid crab, (ama’ama) and the red eye crab (matamea). The coconut crab ( ) used to be found in smaller numbers at Ta’elefaga but is now absent according to the respondents.

The small crabs that tend to be found on the shore are gathered by children, like the ghost crab (avi’ivi’i), red eye crab (matamea) and the land crab (tupa) and these are all abundant especially at Vailele and Gagaifo. Some of these crabs and lobsters were caught and seen at some of the study villages during the fieldwork (Figures 5.10a–h).

Figures 5.10a–h: Crustaceans seen at the study villages

a) Ta’elefaga: lobsters, ula caught at night

c) Ta’elefaga: mangrove crab, pa’alimago caught by fixed gillnet in estuary

h) Vailele: Small ghost crabs on the shore, avi’ivi’i

d) Gagaifo: red spotted crab, k kcaught by night fishers

b) Gagaifo: slipper lobster, papata collected by gillnet near the reef

f) Vailele: small crabs, avi’ivi’i under sand on shore

e) Gagaifo: red eye crab, matamea caught by children

g) Vailele: small crabs, avi’ivi’i on the shorecollected by children

138

The fishers’ creel survey shows the low number of crustaceans caught by fishers during the fieldwork (Table 5.19).

Table 5.19: Frequency of crabs and lobsters from fishers creel surveys at the four study villages during July to August 2004 (Notes: 1) G = Gagaifolevao, M = Ma’asina, T = Ta’elefaga and V = Vailele

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Frequencies of crustaceans and fishers total catch in study villages (No. fishers/total catch)

Totals # fisher /catch

CrabsG41/x

M6/x

T17/x

V44/x 108/x

T t /k k Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatus 5/6 0 2/4 1/1 9/11Avi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda

ceratophthalmus1/1 4/6 5/7

Matamea Red eye crab Eriphia sebana 2/3 2/3Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrata 1/2 1/2Vaevaeuli Black-claw reef

crabEtisus sp.? 1/1 1/1

Lobsters Ula sami Spiny lobsters Panulirus spp. 1/1 3/3 2/1 6/5Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp. 4/3 2/3 1/1 7/7

The crustaceans as seen by the creel survey has declined and so as with their sizes. Lobsters were caught by night diving and spearing fishers at Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga. Some slipper lobsters (papata) were caught by gill nets at Gagaifo and Vailele. Children at Vailele and Gagaifo caught ghost crabs on the shore and some of these were not eaten. The red-eye crab (matamea) was common at Gagaifo but only two kids collected this species during the fieldwork.

5.11 IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE SPECIES

Human activities and natural hazards affect the coast and inshore marine areas, threatening the abundance of marine and coastal resources. The demand for subsistence and commercial needs has accelerated the exploitation of marine resources.

The introduction and use of motor fishing boats (alia) in the 1970s caters for the increasing demand for fisheries products particularly commercial offshore fishing. This increase earnings for Samoa and in addition other modern efficient methods of fishing have also led to over-fishing, causing the decline and local depletion of some marine species. Many fishers have reportedly used destructive methods to increase their catches in order to earn a living as well as feeding their families.

139

5.11.1 Sedimentation and Unclean Lagoon

The discharged discoloured wastewater from the power station increases the velocity of Ta’elefaga River, intensifying sedimentation and causing a murky brown lagoon, which negatively affects inshore marine organisms. These problems exacerbated in the wet season during which the flow of many creeks into the lagoon of Fagaloa Bay increases.

As a result few diving and spearing fishers fish in the murky waters of Ta’elefaga’s lagoon but only near the reef or towards neighbouring villages where the water is clear. Hand collecting/gleaning for shellfish and other marine species are infrequently conducted now at Ta’elefaga because there are fewer invertebrates, shellfish and other seafoods available that women used to gather. Ta’elefaga fishers stated that their lagoon no longer provides the healthy seafood they used to depend on for subsistence use.

According to the surveys at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, dying corals and unclean waters in their lagoon as a result of effluent from the hydro power station caused the decline and eradication of some marine species. For example, a number of large finfish listed that used to be found in the lagoon can now be found only beyond the reef or offshore and in lesser numbers too.

Small finfish have also declined and are now caught only near the reefs. Many finfish, shellfish, sea hare and other species such as the purse-eye scad (atule), pen shells (fole) and the sea hare (gau) have become rare or taken refuge near and beyond the reef or disappeared totally from Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina.

5.11.2 Fishing Activities and Methods Used

In the study villages the young generation lack the knowledge and skills in fishing that their elders possess. Marine and coastal resources are vulnerable and are not managed well due to the lack of villagers’ awareness and concern and mainly because of people's desperate need for cash and survival.

140

Problems with the nearshore marine areas of Gagaifo and Vailele include coral destruction and disturbance from destructive fishing methods and over-fishing of particular species. Barringtoniaasiatica (futu) and Derris malaccensis (ava niukini) were the major poisons used by fishers in previous years. Dynamite and chemicals like clorox were used as stated by fishers from Vailele but these are now banned. However there were a few cases of using ava niukini seen at Gagaifo during the survey.

These methods kill corals and finfish, though other species are thus damaged and the quantity of organisms in the lagoons declines. For example, at Ta'elefaga, Ma'asina and Vailele the school of juvenile rabbit fish (pinel ) rarely appears annually as it used to in previous years and only just recently that it reappears annually at Gagaifo. The villagers claimed that this was caused by the destruction of corals by the use of such fishing methods. Corals and reefs of Vailele are now covered much with coral rubble deposited by the 1990 and 1991 cyclones.

The traditional method of fishing called the fa’amo’a or tu’iga, or the smashing of corals known also as sasa’e at Vailele was a destructive technique that has reportedly damaged corals and small fishes. This method involves placing baskets (ola) on one side of a coral or corals and the fishers’ use materials like sticks or metal bars to smash the corals from the other side chasing all the fish (large and small) towards the baskets. This fishing method was practiced by women of Vailele in previous years and is stated as the main reason that the damselfishes/gregories, Stegastes spp. (tu’u’u) have declined.

Group fishing known as mata conducted by young men was a common practice, usually employed to provide food when a village’s chiefs’ council is having a meeting. This kind of fishing used spears, gill nets or the smashing of corals (sasa’e/ola) to chase and spear the fish towards gill nets or baskets. This was mainly used at Gagaifo where corals cover much of its lagoon where this technique reportedly caused coral breakage and taking of undersized fish. This fishing method is not practiced often nowadays particularly at Ta’elefaga, Ma’asina and Gagaifo as there are easy-to-obtain food substitutes in shops like frozean meat and canned food that can be served at such gatherings.

141

The creel survey of fishers recorded the various methods used by fishers in the study villages during the fieldwork (Figure 5.11).

Figure 5.11: Methods of fishing used at the study villages

Methods of fishing

44%

23%

10%

8%

7%

7% 1%

Handcollecting/gleaningDiving & Spearing

Gillnets

Spearing

Cast nets

Hook & line

Traps (eels)

This survey showed that hand collecting/gleaning was the most frequent activity that took place with 43% occurring mostly at Vailele with the high number of women fishers, compared to 23% of diving and spearing men mainly at Gagaifo. Less commonly used methods included spearing, hook and line and moray eel trapping (Figures 5.12a–c). Gill nets were seen being used in daytime at Ta’elefaga and Gagaifo and cast nets in all villages. Hand collection contains a high proportion of the fishers due to the majority of women fishers at Vailele who fish for sea urchins, sea hares and sea cucumbers for sale and consumption.

Figures 5.12a–c: Some fishing methods and activities at the study villages

c) Vailele: moray eel traps, faga pusi

b) Vailele: kids digging for asaphis on the shore at night

a) Ta’elefaga: Fishers using a canoe, paopao and gillnets, upega

142

Reef gleaning is also damaging to corals for example at Vailele and Gagaifo where this method caused coral breakage and the fishers overturn corals, the habitat of small finfish and other marine organisms. At Gagaifo there were few women fishers seen with children gathering lollyfish (loli) and asaphis (pipi) at shore during the fieldwork.

The fishers’ creel survey (Figure 5.13) shows that many fishers (66%) spent about three to as much as six hours fishing in order to get a decent catch.

Figure 5.13: Hours and tides of fishing

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Percentage and frequency

1-2hrs

3-4hrs

2-3hrs

4-5hrs

6+ hrs

Low

High

Leng

th o

f tim

e &

Low

and

hig

h tid

es

Hours and tides of fishing

Percentage 37 30 25 15 1 88 20

Frequency 34.3 27.8 23.1 13.9 0.9 81.5 18.5

1-2hrs 3-4hrs 2-3hrs 4-5hrs 6+ hrs Low High

The main tide for fishing was during low tide, which accounts for 88% of fishing activities, especially in reef gleaning, gill nets and spearing/diving. The fishing activities that took place during high tides (18.5%) were those using hook and line and cast nets mainly along the shores.

The fishers in the villages claimed that about a generation ago, fishing took one to two hours to get a large catch for a family meal and surplus to distribute. Nowadays fishing takes three and up to four hours in order to get a decent fish-catch for a family meal. At Gagaifo and Ta’elefaga diving and spearing is mainly carried out in the nighttime (Figures 5.14a–c), except when a small subsistence supply is needed, the fishers go out in the daytime. Fishers stated that it takes much longer hours to get a good catch in the daytime.

143

Figures 5.14a–c: Diving/spearing night fishers’ catches

c) Ta’elefaga: the catch include even the under sized crabs, slipper lobster and variety of finfish e.g. surgeonfish, goatfish, rabbitfish,squirrelfish etc. a) Gagaifo: parrotfish, convict

surgeonfish, rabbitfish, goatfish, moray eels, crabs

b) Gagaifo: moray eels, surgeonfish, squirrelfish, parrotfish etc

5.11.3 Impacts of Natural Disasters

Tropical cyclones Ofa in 1990 and Val in 1991 devastated the coastal vegetation and nearshore marine of the study villages. The coastal vegetation of Vailele and Gagaifo was severely damaged; there was also coastal erosion in these villages. Currently banks of coral rubble exist and cover the reef fronts of Vailele and Ma’asina villages as a result of these two cyclones in 1990 and 1991 (Figures 5.15a and b).

Figures 5.15a and 5.15b: Rubble banks deposited on the reefs by cyclones Ofa (1990) and Val (1991)

a) Vailele: Island rubble bank on the reef b) Ma’asina: Coral rubble banks on the reef

144

The strong storm waves from these cyclones eroded the coast of Gagaifo, Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. At Gagaifo most people shifted inland as the area near the sea was flattened after the cyclones leaving few coastal plants (Figure 5.16).

Figure 5.16: Coast of Gagaifo Village flattened by cyclone Ofa leaving fewer coastal plants

Erosion has flattened and eroded the coast of Gagaifo as seen by Figure 5.16 and destroyed coastal plants not only at Gagaifo but also at Vailele, Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. The coastline has also been seriously eroded at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina and the coastal road is right next to the sea (Figure 5.17) with fewer coastal plants for protection and as shown also in Figure 4.16 a-d in Chapter four.

Figure 5.17: Coastal road at Fagaloa next to the sea as seen from Salimu Village (west ofTa'elefaga)

145

5.11.4 Agricultural and Waste Disposal Effects

Agriculture and plantations at Gagaifo and Vailele are concentrated in inland forest areas and have little impact on the coast and marine life compared to Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina. Because of limited flat land at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina, plantations are mainly on the steep mountains. In the wet season rapid runoff occurs mainly at Ta’elefaga where the main road cuts through the mountains behind this village. As a result sedimentation exacerbated and the lagoon is usually murky and discoloured.

Household waste disposal was seen but was not a huge concern at the villages of study, however at Gagaifo, tins and plastics were discarded behind the committee house that is used for village functions. At Ta’elefaga the debris brought down by the Ta’elefaga River and small streams includes logs and sticks that village children collect for firewood, also tins and metals were found at some areas on the shore not only of this village but also of Ma’asina and Vailele.

5.12 MANAGEMENT IN THE STUDY VILLAGES

Conservation of marine resources is not a strong emphasis in these study villages. In the late 1980s marine reserves were planned at Ta’elefaga and other Fagaloa Villages according to respondents, to breed an introduced species of mussel shellfish but this effort was not initiated when the severe cyclones in 1990 and 1991 occurred.

At Gagaifo in the early 1990s a small family-owned business exported small coloured finfish to overseas aquariums. This was carried out for less than 5 years and in the year 2000 another family started exporting live corals, until the chiefs’ council finally banned this activity. The following year, Gagaifo Village participated in the Samoa Fisheries Project to establish a marine reserve but this failed in less than a year due to mismanagement, lack of commitment and probably the village council's decision-making problems. Currently at Gagaifo only a family-owned clam reserve on the western end of the village is regenerating giant clams.

These were the only efforts that took place at these villages and Vailele has not participated in any marine conservation efforts. These villages have complied with the laws imposed by the

146

government under the Fisheries Department in banning destructive methods of fishing like the use of dynamite, chemicals, poisonous plants and even the use of efficient methods like diving gear.

In enforcing these laws each village put forward their own by-laws or ways to fine and penalize individuals who participate in any illegal means of fishing. In this way the village chiefs’ councils play a huge role in the success or controlling over-fishing and destructive fishing. However, in some villages this is not the case as the councils are not active and many chiefs nowadays look for new ways to earn money with little emphasis on preserving their own environment and resources.

This research has observed that the village people particularly the young generation is losing traditional knowledge of coastal and marine species due to changes in lifestyle nowadays. This problem is not only growing in the urban areas but affecting the rural areas too. Management programmes should be applied to all social groups and children in villages to promote public awareness and especially to pass and deliver traditional knowledge to the young generation.

147

CHAPTER SIX GENERAL DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 INTRODUCTION

The coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity are fragile but vital for survival in Samoa. These areas are particularly susceptible to natural and human activities more so now that people increasingly depend on the marine resources to satisfy their needs within the cash economy.

Sadly, Samoa like many other developing island nations is trying to develop its economy and sometimes disregards the serious impacts these developments impose on its environment.

This thesis has attempted to explain how coastal and nearshore ecosystems are significant and discussed the main natural and human activities that severely affect these resources in four study villages in Samoa.

6.2 DISCUSSION AND CHANGES AFFECTING THE STUDY VILLAGES

The coast and nearshore areas provide the common resources that Pacific Island people use for their daily living. The coast is also used for settlement, farming/plantation and infra-structural development. Fisheries provide basic protein in people’s diet and an increasingly important source of cash income although nowadays many have turned to imported frozen and canned food especially tinned fish and corned beef.

The inshore lagoon is the main fishing ground of local communities that practice subsistence and artisanal fishing. At the study villages, artisanal fishing provides for consumption and sale of catches in the local market and within the villages to earn income that people use to buy other domestic necessities.

Tropical cyclones are the main natural hazards that cause serious destruction to the coast and marine resources of the Pacific. Cyclones Ofa in 1990 and subsequently Val in 1991 devastated the entire Samoa Islands and inflicted serious damage to both property and the environment, for

148

example coastal erosion and destruction of corals and reefs of the study villages. Chapter fourand five explained that at Ma’asina and Vailele much of their reef fronts were covered with coral rubble banks as a result of these previous cyclones.

The coasts of Vailele and Gagaifo had been seriously eroded also by cyclones Ofa and Val and common coastal plants such as the Pacific rosewood (milo), cerbera (leva) and the Chinese lantern tree (pu’a) had declined. Many other coastal plants also declined due to the expansion of settlements and had seen many of these plants being replaced by species like hibiscus, coconut, mango trees and planted ornamentals. The mangrove area at Ta’elefaga has been cut for firewood and disturbed by pigs and discarded rubbish thus similar problems occur at the small swamps at Vailele and Gagaifo Villages.

Littering and rubbish disposal mainly plastics and tins are now common in Samoa. Since many of the population settle along the coast, inappropriate rubbish disposal was observed and seen at the study villages, particularly the indiscrimint disposal of tins, metals and plastics.

Sand mining and dredging are critical in the Pacific Islands mainly in large-scale mining, as this has led to environment problems. Lal (1984) recorded that dredging and mining of sand in Fiji from the back reef of Laucala Bay lagoon may have contributed to the loss of the turtle grass (Syringodium isoetifolium) that led to the decline of fish in this area that depend on this seagrass for food. The mining operation at Mulinu’u in Apia, Samoa was suspected as the cause for the eradication of the sea hare (Dolabella auricularia) from this area (Bell, 1985 cited in Fellow and Taylor 1991). At the study villages, sand mining occurs on a small scale particularly at the villages of Vailele and Gagaifo for beautification purposes and in mixing cement for building houses.

The villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga have limited flatland and the population is concentrated on the narrow coastal zone, which is also used for plantations, roads and infra-structural development to improve communication and services. These include roads and also the hydro electricity power station located at Ta’elefaga village.

149

Agriculture on steep slopes and mountains at Fagaloa and the road that cuts through the high mountains increase surface runoff especially in the wet season. Furthermore, the small rivers and creeks at Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga intensify soil erosion and sedimentation. The corals of Ta’elefaga are degraded and the lagoon is quite barren except near the reef, where corals exist but are also dying. Similar situations occur in other Pacific Islands for example in Guam, heavy sedimentation was recorded by Richmond et al. (2002), with a road project in the early 1990s on the southern coast that affected 10 km of fringing reefs killing all the corals.

Wastewater discharged from the power station at Ta’elefaga causes high sedimentation thus smothering and killing of corals, resulted in a murky lagoon, the decline and local extirpation of some marine species. Examples include the depletion of the sea hare (gau) and pen shells (fole), the rarity of venus clams (tugane), boring sea urchins (tuitui), sea cucumbers and the purse-eye scad fish (atule), which used to appear annually at Ta'elefaga, but have not been seen in the last three years. Fishing activities and yields clearly declined at Ta’elefaga and Ma’asina due to impacts from the establishment of the hydro electricity power station.

The villages of Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga used to depend much on marine resources for their daily consumption because Fagaloa District is isolated behind high mountains from the main transportation route to the urban area. Nowadays the road that cuts through the mountain going down to Ta’elefaga and Fagaloa Bay has been upgraded and people can easily travel to town. This assist people from Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga in buying many of their necessities from town, especially frozen and tinned food that is becoming the common type of food these people consume.

In the study villages, commercial uses have led to the over-harvesting of particular marine species such as the giant clams, top shell, turbo, bêche-de-mer and some finfishes like the surgeonfish and unicornfish. At Vailele sea cucumbers, boring sea urchins and shellfish mainly pen shells are gathered not only for consumption but also for selling and they are increasingly in short supply. Similarly, as recorded by Sulu et al. (2002) in Fiji, the emperor species (Lethrinus)and mullet (Muligidae) have been over-fished whilst the bumpheaded parrotfish (Bolbometopon)was fished to local depletion in most areas.

150

The fishers at the study villages were taking undersized finfish, crabs like the red spotted crab (k k ), lobsters (ula, papata) and giant clams (faisua). The giant clams were over-fished at these villages in the 1970s to the 1990s, similar to all areas of Samoa. Landings of giant clams, trochus, turbo, octopus, crabs and lobsters have now declined and rarely seen at the fish market in Apia Town. During the two months of this research, most of these species were not seen at the fish market during the time of observation. They were only seen but in fewer numbers in creel surveys in the study villages.

The common destructive and efficient fishing methods reported in the surveys included gill nets, cast nets and spear diving using torches for night fishing. Fixed gill nets are used at Ta’elefaga’s mangrove estuary to catch mangrove crabs. Furthermore, night crab fishers frequently collect mangrove crabs that, has contributed to the decline of this species. Gill and cast nets target undersized species. Species commonly caught by cast nets include mullets (anae), anchovies (sal ), goatfish (i’asina, vete) and rabbitfish (lo, pa’u’ulu) all of which are declining in abundance and size.

Myers (1989) and Sherwood (1993) in Dalzell et al. (1995) reported that the bumpheaded parrotfish and the napoleon wrasse (Chelinus undulates) were driven to very low population levels due to commercial spear fishing in Guam and Palau.

The lagoons of Gagaifo and Vailele are in better condition compared to Ma’asina and Ta’elefaga lagoons however the use of destructive fishing techniques needs to be managed, like reef gleaning at Vailele for subsistence and commercial needs. At Gagaifo collecting sea anemone (lumane, matalelei) for sale leads to coral breakage and a few fishers still use the illegal Derrismalaccensis (ava niukini) rotenone fish poison, which harms marine organisms and kills undersized fish.

Exportation of live corals and small coloured fish took place at Gagaifo in the late 1980s to the early 1990s and even the crown-of-thorns starfish outbreak that affected Samoa in the late 1970s to the early 1990s was a more serious problem at Gagaifo compared to the other study villages.

151

The annual rise of the palolo worm at Gagaifo and neighbouring Matautu Village became a rarityin the 1990s. According to the respondents of Gagaifo, these commercial activities and way of fishing in their lagoon have contributed to the scarcity of the palolo worm. In Tonga, Wenzel (1989) reported that black coral was over-harvested due to its uses and importance in the jewellery industry.

All these human activities in the Pacific and Samoa contributed to the degradation of Islands' coastal and nearshore biodiversity.

6.3 MANAGEMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS

Government agencies and non-governmental organizations in Samoa and other Pacific Islands are increasingly involved in conservation projects to preserve and sustainably manage nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity.

The Samoa Fisheries Project run by the Fisheries Division and funded by Australian aid developed fisheries management plans and established a system of community-based marine protected areas (MPA) in many villages throughout Samoa. During the fieldwork only Gagaifo Village from the four study villages participated in this conservation programme.

The village marine reserve at Gagaifo under the Fisheries Project failed within a year. This shows weak management by the village council (fono), which was quite unstable and even at the time of the field study the council broke into two parties. This indicates the significance of the local people’s roles. Even though the village council is a good system for running these kinds of programmes, it depends on how good and committed these people are in order for the project (or any project) to work.

In Samoa, the 1996 Fisheries Regulations included regulations concerning fishing practices, services and species. The Village Fono Bill 1990 bolstered the authority of village councils in managing the villages’ resources (Peteru, 1993). Village councils enforce their own by-laws as used in the Samoan Fisheries Project by participating villages (Ropeti, 2004).

152

It was observed during the field study that villagers lack the concern and awareness for the need to conserve their resources because many are trying to cope with the high cost of living by focusing on opportunities for cash income. A lot of people are desperate to find ways to earn money immediately and usually the fishers’ take even the undersized seafood and sell in their villages.

Subsistence fishing seemed to be reasonably sustainable but the increasing reliance on cash economies now have increased people’s demands, leading to greater commercial exploitation of coastal and nearshore resources. The offshore fisheries resources need to be exploited in order to minimize the heavy use of the lagoon as fishing grounds. However, fishing boats are quite expensive for many subsistence fishers.

People at Ma’asina and especially Ta’elefaga have complained about the hydro power station and its effects in their village but so far there is no alternative. In the village of Sili on Savai’i Island, a similar hydro dam project was proposed to the village council by the government. Environment non-government organizations (such as Siosiomaga Society) are now assisting the village council and people of Sili to use other alternative ways of using their fresh water resource to earn income, instead of a hydro dam.

6.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This research has shown that coastal and nearshore ecosystems and biodiversity are the most significant resources for the livelihood of the local people and the Pacific alike. Nevertheless people are using these resources at an accelerating rate as seen by the over-harvesting and over-fishing of species at the study villages. As a result many finfishes, shellfishes, crustaceans, sea cucumbers, sea hares and other species have drastically declined or have become depleted.

The dependence of the local people on the cash economy increase the use of destructive and efficient methods of fishing thus put pressure on the declining resources. This is a concern that if local communities continued to ignore these issues they will face major crises in the future concerning the coastal and marine limited resources.

153

Education, management projects and conservation sites are being proposed and are practiced nowadays in many Pacific Islands to deal with marine pollution, over-fishing, mangrove degradation, coastal erosion and other nearshore issues.

Development of partnerships by governments or agencies with donors/non-government organizations and local communities in initiating and carrying out conservation projects can provide a positive foundation for successful conservation. In Tuvalu, for instance, the mangrove restoration project supported by the Tuvalu Association of NGOs (TANGO) teaches women how to collect the dyes they use for handicraft without damaging fragile mangroves (AFAP Report, 2001).

The importance of coastal and nearshore marine resources as raised by this study points to the need to develop management and conservation models to sustain these ecosystems. Government officers interviewed pointed out how important it is to develop awareness and concern not only among government officials, agencies but mainly the local communities from elders to children in order for them to use their resources in a sustainable manner.

Communities need to be empowered to protect and manage their resources. Educating local communities is crucial to raise the awareness and concern of these people to manage their resources. Trainings, public awareness activities in the local language and encouraging the use of traditional knowledge can assist the local people to participate in conservation efforts. Including environmental resource management in the school curriculum is a significant long-term goal to sustain coastal and nearshore marine biodiversity.

Marine species that have become rare or declined have not been identified in many areas in Samoa; nor have the impacts of fishing activities and other uses of the nearshore ecosystems in most villages. This thesis has attempted to do so as a basis for better understanding of the critical importance and fragility of the nearshore coastal ecosystem and associated biodiversity to the people of Samoa. It also stresses the need for greater awareness as a basis for the evolution of more sustainable management and development alternatives for the benefit of future generations.

154

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, T., Dalzell, P. and Ledua, E. c.1998. Ocean resources. Accessed 5th April fromhttp://www.spc.org.nc/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/GEOGRAPHY/Ocean.htm

AFAP. 2001. AFAP 2000 – 2001 Program report. The Australian Foundation for the Peoples of Asia and the Pacific, Sydney.

Asian Development Bank, 2000. Samoa 2000: Building on recent reforms. Asian DevelopmentBank, Manila.

Andrew, G.J and Holthus, P.F. 1988. Marine environment survey: Proposed Aleipata IslandsNational Park, Western Samoa. Unpublished report for the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Barnabé, G. and Barnabé-Quet, R. 1997. Ecology and management of coastal waters: Theaquatic environment. Springer and Praxis Publising, Chichester.

Brodie, J. and Morrison, J. 1984. The management and disposal of hazardous wastes in the Pacific Islands. Ambio Journal 13 (5-6):331-335.

Brodie, J. E., Arnould, C., Eldredge, L., Hammond, L., Holthus, P., Mowbray, D. and Tortell, P.1990. State of the marine environment in the South Pacific Region. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies No. 127, 1990 and SPREP Topic Review No. 40, 1990. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Brown, B.E., 1986. Human induced damage to coral reefs. Unesco reports in marine science –Results of a regional Unesco (COMAR), Diponegoro University Jepara and National Institute of Oceanology, Jakarta.

Brown, R.P.C. and Walker, A. 1995. Migrants and their Remittances: Results of a householdsurvey of Tongans and Western Samoans in Sydney. Pacific Studies Monograph No. 17, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Bryant, D., Burke, L., McManus, J. and Spalding, M. 1998. Reefs at risk: A map based indicatorof the threats to world’s coral reefs. World Resource Institute, Washington D.C.

Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf/RaR.pdf

Burke, L., Kura, Y., Kassem, K., Revenga, C., Spalding, M. and McAllister, D. 2001. Pilot analysisof Global Ecosystems: Coastal ecosystems. World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.

Burne, R.V. 1991. Carbonate sediment budgets and coastal management in South Pacific IslandNations. In workshop on coastal processes in the South Pacific Island Nations, Lae, Papua New Guinea, 1 – 8 October, 1987. SOPAC Technical Bulletin 7:45-53, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva .

155

Central Bank of Samoa (CBS). 2004. Central Bank Bulletin. Accessed 5th August 2005 from http://www.cbs.gov.ws

Chase, R. and Veitayaki, J. 1992. Implications of Climate Change and Sea-level Rise forWestern Samoa. SPREP Reports and Studies Series No. 59. South Pacific Regional

Environment Programme, Apia.

Dalzell, P., Adams, T.J.H. and Polunin, N.V.C. 1995. Coastal fisheries in the Pacific Islands. First draft of artcle for the South Pacific Commission, Noumea. Accessed 5th April 2005 from

http://www.spc.int/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/CoastalFisheriesInPacific.pdf

Dalzell, P., Adams, T. and Farman, R. 1996. Status of Pacific Island coral reef fisheries. Paperpresented at 8th International Coral Reef Symposium, Panama, 1996. Accessed 5th

March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/statreef.htm

Department of Statistics. 1993. Report of the census of population and housing 1991. Government of Samoa’s Department of Statistics, Apia.

Eltayab, M.M. 2004. Review of the trochus fishery in Sudan. SPC Trochus Information Bulletin, No. 11. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

Fa’asili, U. and Taua, A. 2001. Review of the village fisheries management plans of the ExtensionProgramme in Samoa. SPC Field Report No.7. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

FAO. 1994. The role of agriculture, forestry and fisheries in the sustainable development.Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=docrep/T3384E/t3384e04.htm

____. 2000. The use of students in surveying subsistence fisheries – A Pacific Islandcase study. FAO fisheries circular No. 962. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

——. 2002. Pacific island fisheries: Regional and country information. RAP Publications 2002/13. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Bangkok. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/DOCREP/005/AC682E/ac68e05.htm

FAO and SPREP. 1996. Sustainable management of natural resources in the South Pacifictechnical consultation of the South Pacific small island developing states on sustainabledevelopment in agriculture, forestry and fishery. South Pacific Regional EnvironmentProgramme, Apia

Fellow, J.W. and Taylor, L.M. 1991. Western Samoa: An investigation into the sources andregulations of marine pollution. Samoa Lands and Survey and Environment Department, Apia.

156

Fisheries Division. 2003. Fisheries Division Annual Report: July 2002 – June 2003. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture, Forest, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Gangaiya, P. and Wele, I. 1994. Land-based pollution sources of the marine environment inWestern Samoa : a case study. SPREP reports and study series no.81. South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, Apia.

GESAMP (Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution). 1990. The state of themarine environment. UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies. No. 115. United Nations

Environment Programme, Nairobi.

Gillet, R. and Lightfoot, C. 2002. The contribution of fisheries to the economies of Pacific Islandcountries. Report prepared for the Asian Development Bank, the Forum Fisheries Agency and World Bank. Asian Development Bank, Manila. Accessed 4th March 2005 from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Contribution_Fisheries_Pacific_Economies/ contents.pdf

Gillie, R. D. 1992. Ranadi beach coastal erosion study Honiara, Guadalcanal Solomon Islands.SOPAC Technical Report 152. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

—— (ed.). 1994. Distinctive physical features of Pacific Island coastal zones. Proceedings of thefirst and second regional coastal protection meetings, Apia. SOPAC Miscellaneous

Report 177. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

Green, A. 1996. Status of the coral reefs of the Samoan Archipelago. Department of Marine and Wildlife, Pago Pago, American Samoa.

Hamnet, M.P. 1990. Pacific Islands resource development and environmental management. Chapter 16 in Beller, W., D’Ayala, P. and Hein, P. (eds). Sustainable development andenvironmental management of small Islands. Man and the Biosphere series, Vol. 5.United Nation Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Paris.

Hickey, F.R. and Johannes, R.E. 2004a. Evolution of village-based marine resource managementin Vanuatu between 1993 and 2001. Coastal region and small Island papers 15. United

Nation Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Paris: 48.

Hickey, F.R. and Johannes, R.E. 2004b. Recent evolution of village-based marine resourcemanagement in Vanuatu. SPC Traditional Resource Management and Knowledge

Information Bulletin. No. 14. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 05 March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/Trad/14/Trad14-hickey-johannes.htm

Hinrichsen, D. 1998. Coastal waters of the world: Trends, threats and strategies. Island Press,Washington D.C.

Howorth, R. 1983. Coastal erosion in Kiribati: Visit to South Tarawa 23 August – 8 September1983. CCOP/SOPAC Technical Report 31, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission,Suva.

157

Kaczynski, V. M. 2001. Integrative analysis of human impacts on oceans and coasts in the Asia- Pacific. Paper for proceedings at International seminar on population, markets and sustainability of the ocean and coastal resources: Perspectives of transition and developing economies of the Asia-Pacifc at the University of Pekin, Beijing, March 16, 2001.

Kay, E.A. 1999. Biogeography. In Rapaport, M. (ed). The Pacific Islands: Environment andSociety. The Bess Press, Honolulu: 76–92.

Kay, R.C. 1993. Assessment of coastal vulnerability and resilience to sea-level rise and climatechange: Case study – Upolu Island, Western Samoa. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Kear, D. and Wood, B.L. 1959. The geology and hydrology of Western Samoa. New ZealandDepartment of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington.

Kearney, R.E. 1976. A regional approach to fisheries management. 5th Pacific commission area,Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

King, M.G. 1991. Fisheries in the economy of the South Pacific. Institute of Pacific studies. University of the South Pacific, Suva.

——. 1995. Fisheries biology, assessment and management. Fishing News Books, London.

Kitalong, A.H. and Dalzell, P. 1994. A preliminary assessment of the status of the inshore coralreef fish stocks in Palau. Technical document No. 6, Inshore fisheries research project,

South Pacific Commission, Noumea. Accessed 6th May 2005 from http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:i8aeoCdcr0gJ:www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Contribution_Fisheries_Pacific_Economies/references.pdf+Kitalong+-+Dalzell&hl=en

Klinkhamers, P. 1992. Western Samoa: Land-based pollution sources and their effects on themarine environment. South Pacific Regional Evironment Programme, Apia.

Lal, N. 1984. Environmental implications of coastal development in Fiji. Ambio Journal Vol. 13 No. 5-6.

Lovell, E.R. and Toloa, F. 1994. Palolo deep national marine reserve: A survey and inventoryand information report. SPREP report and study series No.84. South Pacific Regional

Environmental Programme, Apia.

Lovell, E., Afzal, D., Deiye, M., Garrigue, C., Hughes, A., Pakoa, K., Poulasi, T., Sabetian, A., Samuelu, J., Solofa, A., Sulu, R., Sykes, H., Virly, S. and Wantiez, L. 2004. Status ofcoral reefs in the Southwest Pacific: Fiji, Nauru, New Caledonia, Samoa, SolomonIslands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 37-356. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2004-12.pdf

158

Maharaj, R.J. c.2001. Pacific islands at risk: Foreshore development and their vulnerability andimplications for adaptation strategies to climate change. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.survas.mdx.ac.uk/pdfs/3maharaj.pdf

Maiava, I.A., and Otobed, D.O. 1994. Republic of Palau: State of the Environment Report 1994.South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, Apia.

McCue, J. 2005. Coastal management into 2020: The risks to the tourism industry in the Pacific. Prepared paper for Tourism Investment Conference, February 2005, Fiji. Accessed 5th

April 2005 from http://www.profitpacific.com/site_en/partnership_meeting/presentation/ coastal_management.pdf

MNRE. 2000a. Samoa’s first report to the Convention of Biological Diversity. Ministry of NaturalResources and Environment, Apia.

——. 2000b. Environment Forum. Government of Samoa Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Apia.

Morton, J., Richards, M., Mildner, S. and Bell, L.J. 1989. The shore ecology of Upolu: Western Samoa. University of Auckland, Auckland.

Mulipola, A. 2002. Marine resources of Samoa. Prepared for Samoa’s National report for the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, July 2002. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture, Forests, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Odum, W. E. 1976. Ecological guidelines for tropical coastal development. IUCN Publications New Series (42): 1–61.

Odyssey Expedition. 2001. Coral reef bleaching. Accessed 10th October 200e from http://www.odysseyexpeditions.org

Onorio, K and Tamata, B. 1997. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) report on theaugmentation phase of the Afulilo Hydro Power scheme in Samoa. SPREP report and studies series No.101. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Pearsall, S.H. and Whistler, W.A. 1991. Terrestrial ecosystem mapping for Western Samoa:Summary project report and proposed national parks and reserve plans. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

Petersen, E. and Prestes, M.2000. Rethinking fisheries policy in the Pacific. Resourcemanagement in Asia-Pacific working paper No. 39. Resource management in Asia-

Pacific Program Research school for Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra.

Peteru, C. 1993. Environmental legislation review: Western Samoa. South Pacific RegionalEnvironment Programme (SPREP), Apia.

159

Pillai, G. and Sirikolo, M. Q. 2001. Mangroves of the Solomon Islands. Marine Studies Technical Report 2001/01, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

Purcell, S., Gardner, D. and Bell, J. 2002. Developing optimal strategies for restocking sandfish: acollaborative project in New Caledonia. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin No. 16. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

Quarrie, J.(ed.). 1992. Earth Summit 1992: The United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment, Rio de Janeiro. The Regency Press Corporation, London.

Richmond, B. 1991. Coastal morphology, shoreline stability, and nearshore mineral resources ofUpolu, Western Samoa. CCOP/SOPAC Technical report no.90. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

Richmond, R., Birkeland, A., Davis, G., Edward, A., Emaurois, C., Golbuu, Y., Graig, P., Green, C., Gutierrez, J., Houk, P., Ideochong, N., Kelty, R., Maragos, J., Paulay, G., Starmer, J., Tafileichig, A., Tianni, M. and Velde, N.V. 2002. Status of the coral reefs in Micronesia and American Samoa: US affiliated and freely associated Islands in the Pacific. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed). Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 217–236. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-12.pdf

Ropeti, E. 2004. An overview of the community/village-based fisheries management programmein Samoa: Community-based fisheries management programme training for Tokelau andAmerican Samoa, 3 – 9 March 2004, Apia. Government of Samoa Ministry of Agriculture,

Forest, Fisheries and Meteorology, Apia.

Sadovy, Y. 2005. Humphead wrasse listed on CITES. SPC Live reef fish information Bulletin No. 13. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 5th March 2005 fromhttp://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/LRF/lrf.htm

Salvat, B. 2002. Status of southeast and central Pacific coral reefs ‘Polynesia Mana Node’: Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Kiribati, Niue, Tokelau, Tonga, Wallis and Futuna. In C.R. Wilkinson (ed) Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 203–215.Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-11.pdf

Scott, D. A. (ed.) 1993. A directory of wetlands in Oceania. International Waterfowl and Wetlands Research Bureau (IWRB), Slimbridge, U.K. and Asian Wetland Bureau (AWB), Kuala Lumpur. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.wetlands.org/inventory&/OceaniaDir/Contents.htm

Shearwood, A. and Howorth, R. (eds). 1996. Coasts of Pacific Islands. SOPAC MiscellaneousReport 222, South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

160

Skelton, P. A., Bell, J.L., Mulipola, A. and Trevor, A. 2000. The Status of the Coral Reefs andMarine Resources of Samoa. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_google.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_WSM.pdf

Solomon, S.M. 1994. A review of coastal processes and analysis of historical coastal change inthe vicinity of Apia, Western Samoa. SOPAC Technical report 208. South Pacific Applied

Geoscience Commission, Suva.

SOPAC and SPREP. 1994. Coastal protection in the Pacific islands: Current trends and futureprospects. SOPAC Miscellaneous Publication No. 177. South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, Suva.

SOPAC. 2003. Coastal management. Accessed 5th September 2004 fromhttp://wwww.sopac.org.fj/secretariat/MemberCountries/ws/csd.html

South, G.R., Skelton, P., Veitayaki, J., Resture, A., Carpenter, C., Pratt, C. and Lawedrau, A. 2004. Pacific Islands, GIWA Regional assessment 62. University of Kalmar, Kalmar, Sweden. Accessed 5th April 2005 from

http://www.giwa.net/areas/reports/r62/giwa_regional_assessment_62.pdf

SPREP. 1994a. Western Samoa: NEMS – National environment and development managementstrategies. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1994b. Assessment of coastal vulnerability and resilience to sea-level rise and climatechange: case study-Yasawa Islands, Phase II. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1995. Report of the fourth meeting on the regional marine turtle conservation programme.South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Apia.

——. 1996. International coral reef initiative (ICRI) Pacific region strategy. South PacificRegional Environmental Programme, Apia.

——. 2003. Conservation management. Accessed 10th December 2004 fromhttp://www.sprep.org.ws/topic/marine.htm

Statistical Services. 2001. 2001 Census of population and housing: A special release of censusselected tabulations. Government of Samoa Treasury Department, Apia.

Sulu R., C. Hay, P. Ramohia and M. Lam., 2000. The Coral Reefs of Solomon Islands. GlobalCoral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_SLB.pdf

161

Sulu, R., Cumming, R., Kumar, L., Lober, M., Mulipola, A., Pakoa, K., Poulasi, T., Sauni, S., Wantiez, L. 2002. Status of Coral Reefs in the Southwest Pacific Region to 2002: Fiji, Nauru, New Caledonia, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed.). Status of coral reefs of the world: 2002. GCRMN Report, Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville: 181-201. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\scr2002-10.pdf

Suluvae, E.A. 2000. Environmental change of selected mangrove areas in Samoa. In Taulealo, T.I and Wulf, V. (eds). Samoa: Environment forum – Proceedings of the National

environment forum 2000. No.2. Minitry of Natural Resources and Environments, Apia: 7–10.

Taulealo, T.I. 1993. Western Samoa: State of the environment report. South Pacific RegionalEnvironment Programme, Apia.

Thaman, R.R.1989. Coastal reforestation and agroforestry as immediate ameliorative measuresto address global warming and to promote sustainable habitation of low-lying and coastalareas. University of the South Pacific, Suva.

____. 1994. Land, plants, animals and people: Community-based biodiversity conservation(CBBBC) as a basis for ecological, cultural and economic survival in the Pacific Islands.

Pacific Science Association Information Bulletin, Vol. 46, No. 1-2, April/June: 1–20.

Thaman, R.R., Morrison, J., Morrell, W.J. and Thaman, B. 2003. Wasted Islands? Waste and theneed for integrated waste management in the Pacific Islands: Current status and prospects for reduction and safe disposal. Paper presented at the Barbados Plan of Action+ Management of Experts on waste management in small Island Developing States (SIDS), Havana, Cuba, 27 Oct – 1 Nov, 2003. Accessed 4th May 2005 from http://www.sidsnet.org/docshare/other/20031105164530_WASTED_ISLANDS_Draft_Thaman_et_al._for_CD_28.10.03.doc.

Treasury Department, 2002. Strategy for the development of Samoa 2002–2004: Opportunitiesfor All. Government of Samoa Treasury Department Economic Policy and Planning

Division, Apia.

Trianni, M.S. 2002. Summary of data collected from the sea cucumber fishery on Rota,Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin No. 16. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea.

UNDP. 1999. Pacific human development report 1999 : Creating opportunities. United NationsDevelopment Programme, Suva.

UNDP and FAO. 1993. Samoa: Fisheries resources assessment for management. Food andAgricultural Organization, Rome.

162

UNEP. 1996. Asia-Pacific Environment Outlook – Chapter 1: Emerging Issues – Marine andcoastal environments. Accessed 4th May 2005 from http://www.rrcap.unep.org/apeo/Chp1g-marine.html

UNESCAP. 2000. Review of the state of the environment of the Pacific Islands. Accessed 4th

April 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/mced2000/pacific/Soe-pacific.htm

____. 2003a. Fishery resources development in Samoa. Accessed 4th April 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/drpad/publication/integra/modalities/samoa...

——. 2003b. Environmental implications of growth and development in Suva. Accessed 4th

October 2004 from http://www.unescap.org/drpad/publication/integra/wolume2/fiji/2fjo...

Uthicke, S. and Conand, D. 2005. Local examples of beche-de-mer overfishing: An initialsummary and request for information. SPC Beche-de-mer Information Bulletin, No.21.

Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. Accessed 05 March 2005 from http://www.spc.int/coastfish/News/BDM/21/Uthicke-Conand.pdf

Va’a, L.F. 2001. Saili matagi: Samoan migrants in Australia. Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific, Suva and National University of Samoa, Apia.

van Pel, H. 1960. Report on the sea fisheries of Western Samoa. South Pacific Commission, Noumea.

Veitayaki, J. 1995. Fisheries development in Fiji: The quest for sustainability. Institute of PacificStudies and Ocean Resources Management Programme, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

Viles, H. and Spencer, T. 1995. Coastal problems: Geomorphology ecology and society at thecoast. Edward Arnold, London.

Vuki, V., Naqasima, M and Vave, R. 2000. Status of Fiji's Coral Reefs. Global Coral ReefMonitoring Network (GCRMN) Report. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Accessed April 15th 2005 from http://www.reefbase.org/binary_download_file.asp?pdf\GCRMN_2000_FJI.pdf

Wenzel, L. 1989. Environment and change in the Pacific: A survey of resource use and policy inFiji, Tonga, W.Samoa, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands. Institute of Natural Resources Environmental Studies Report, No. 43. University of the South Pacific, Suva

Whistler, W.A. 1996. Samoan herbal medicine: O la’au ma vai fofo o Samoa. Isle Botanica, Honolulu.

Whistler, W.A. 2002. The Samoan Rainforest: A guide to the vegetation of the SamoanArchipelago. Isle Botanica, Honolulu.

163

World Bank, c.2001. Chapter 2: Managing coastal areas. Accessed 5th April 2005 fromhttp://www.siteresources.worldbank.orgIN

WWF. 2002. Conserving marine biodiversity in Fiji. Accessed 5th April 2005 from http://www.wwfpacific.org.fj/marineresources

Zann, L.P. 1983. Traditional management and conservation of fisheries in Kiribati and Tuvalu.Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific, Suva.

____. 1991. The Inshore Resources of Upolu, Western Samoa: Coastal Inventory AndFisheries Database. Unpubl. Report 5. FAO/UNDP Project, No.5. Sam/89/002.

____. 1999. A new (old) approach to inshore resources management in Samoa. Ocean andCoastal Management, 42: 569–590.

____. 2000. State of the marine environment report for Australia: Technical summary. Ocean Rescue 2000, Department of Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra.

Zann, L. P. and Bolton, L. 1985. The distribution, abundance and ecology of the blue coralHeliopora corulea (Pallas) in the Pacific. Coral Reefs, 4:125–134.

Zann, L.P. and Mulipola, A. 1995. The inshore resources of Western Samoa database: Coastalinventory and fisheries. Paper prepared for the SPC/FFA workshop on Management of

inshore fisheries, 26 June – 7 July.

164

APPENDIX Ia - Field work guide

TASKS:

1. Record the number of fishers (men/women) visible from the shore (every 2nd hour of the day).

2. Interview returning fishers to find out what they caught etc. 3. Interview village households to find out: -

- fish importance to them (consumption/commercial) - if they went fishing yesterday/night

RECORDING THE NUMBERS OF FISHERS/OBSERVE COASTAL ACTIVITIES – FORM 1

Select a part of the shore which gives the best view of the lagoon and reef. Record the number of canoes or fishers seen fishing on the lagoon or on the shore every 2nd hour of daylight (e.g. 6am, 8am, 10am, … to 6pm) Record what they were doing (e.g. crab fishing, netting, spearing, collecting shells, traveling to outer reef for fishing, FORM 1). Observe/record other human activities on the shore/coast apart from fishing.

INTERVIEWING FISHERS ON THEIR RETURN FROM FISHING TRIPS – FORM2

Meet the fishers as they land their catch. Try and interview at least 6 each day. (One form for each fisher). Identify the type of fish, crab, shells etc and bundles or bottles of sea weeds, jellyfish, sea etc. For those fishing at night – interview in the morning.

HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEWS/SURVEY – FORM 3

Sampling: Large villages (e.g. 50 or more households) sample about 20. Small villages (e.g. 30 or less households) sample 5 to 10. Try and sample a cross-section of households (i.e. different classes, economic groups) but in a random way. E.g. you might walk down a village road and pick every 5th house. Who to see/interview: Best to talk to the household cook/wife rather than the fisherman for she/he will know what was actually eaten.

165

APPENDIX Ib

FORM 3 – HOUSEHOLD FISH CONSUMPTION/EFFORTS AND IMPORTANCE

1. Village:_________________________________________________________ 2. Occupation of head of household______________________________________ 3. How many people in thehousehold:____________________________________ 4. How many in the household that are formally employed/work?______________ 5. How many people that fish in the household:____________________________ 6. How many times/days of the week that the household consume fish:__________ 7. Did the household consume fish yesterday?_____________________________ 8. What kinds/names of fish consumed?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9. Did the household consume shellfish yesterday? What kinds of shellfish? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10. Where did the fish and shellfish consumed come from? Purchased/Captured________________________________________________

11. How many members of the household that went fishing yesterday? ________________________________________________________________

12. How long did they spend fishing? (hrs) ________________________________________________________________

13. How did they fish? Canoe, line, gillnetting, diving, reef collecting, outboard, other.________________________________________________________________And where did they fish? Reef, lagoon, mangrove/muddy shore, open sea. ________________________________________________________________When? Day/Night (time)____________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________14. What kinds/names of fish commonly caught by the household fishers? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________15. What shellfish commonly collected by the household? ___________________________________________________________________16. Do you sell/give away or eat all the catch? Please explain. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________17. Please explain the main problems regarding the coast, reefs and fisheries in this

area. ___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

166

APPENDIX Ic

FORM 2 – INTERVIEWS WITH THE FISHERS (Creel survey)

1. DATE: __________________ 2. TIME: __________________ 3. GENDER: _______________ 4. How many people in the fishing group_____________________________________ 5. When did they go fishing? Start_________________ End__________________ 6. Where did they fish? Shore, Inner lagoon, outer lagoon, reef, open seas? ______________________________________________________________________7. Fishing methods. Crab nets,number/set________________________________ Gill net______________________________________________________________ Cast net_____________________________________________________________ Hand collecting_______________________________________________________ Spearing_____________________________________________________________ Diving______________________________________________________________ Hook and line________________________________________________________ Other methods________________________________________________________ 8. What did they catch? Type of fish/shellfish (no. of each) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________9. What will happen to the catch? All eaten by the aiga; Some given away; Some sold; All sold. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

167

APPENDIX Id

FORM 1 – FISHING AND COASTAL ACTIVITIES

TODAY’S DATE (Aso):__________________________________________________ TIME (Taimi):__________________________________________________________ FISHING ACTIVITIES (No. of canoes, fishers, types of fishing): No. of canoes (numera/aofai o vaa fagota): ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________No. of fishers (aofai o tagata fagota/aufaifaiva): __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Types of fishing (ituaiga faigafaiva): _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Other human activities on the shore/coast (isi gaioiga I le gataifale/matafaga): ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

168

APPENDIX Ie

HUMAN IMPACTS ON COASTAL AND NEARSHORE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS AND BIODIVERSITY: Taelefaga and Maasina Villages (Fagaloa Bay) and Vailele Village

GROUP NAME _______________________ VILLAGE ______________________ DATE _______

A. COASTAL VEGETATION USES

1. List down the 10 most important coastal plants found in the village (list according to importance). Oa laau taua e 10 tu-matafaga I totonu o lo outou nuu? 1__________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 2 _________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 3 ________________________________________ 8 _________________________________________ 4 ________________________________________ 9_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 10 ________________________________________

2. List down the uses of these plants named above. How often do you use them and for what purposes? Oa aoga o nei laau sa ta’ua. E faaaoga soo pe leai nei laau ae mo a o latou faaaogaina? Plant1 uses:___________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes__________________________________________________________________________

Plant 2 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 3 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 4 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 5: ______________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 6 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 7 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 8 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

Plant 9 uses: __________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

169

Plant10 uses: _________________________________________________________________________ How often you use: ____________________________________________________________________ Purposes___________________________________________________________________________

3. Name the coastal plants, which are now extinct or rare and the reasons why they have been extinct or rare. Oa laau tu-matafaga ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Reason: __________________________________________

4. What other organisms that depend on these plants for habitat? Are they rare/extinct? Explain why. Oa isi meaola/manu e nonofo I nei nofoaga tu-matafaga? Faamatala pe o maua pea nei manu (pe o tele pea lo latou aofai pe leai poo ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________ Abundance___________________________ Reason______________________________

5. Explain the main impacts humans have on these coastal plants. Are there any management strategies that are used to maintain or conserve these plants and to be done by whom? Faamatala poo a aafiaga matuia e mafua mai I tagata o loo aafia ai laau tu-matafaga. Pe o iai fuafuaga ma ni gaioiga e faasaoina ai nei laau tu-matafaga ae o ai e faatinoina nei fuafuaga?

Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Impact____________________________________________ What can be done and by whom________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

B. MARINE RESOURCES AND USES

6a. Name 20 important reef and nearshore large finfish caught by fishers for sale or local consumption (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa I’a taua e 20 lapopoa o loo fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo e faatau atu ma maua mai ai tupe?

1__________________________________ 11_________________________________________ 2__________________________________ 12_________________________________________ 3__________________________________ 13_________________________________________ 4__________________________________ 14_________________________________________ 5__________________________________ 15_________________________________________ 6__________________________________ 16_________________________________________ 7__________________________________ 17_________________________________________ 8__________________________________ 18_________________________________________ 9__________________________________ 19_________________________________________ 10_________________________________ 20_________________________________________

170

6b. Name 6 reef and nearshore large finfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What action that can be done and by whom? Oa I’a taua e 6 lapopoa I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga e tatau ona fai pe o faia e faasao ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina nei gaioiga? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

7a. Name 20 important reef and nearshore small finfish caught by fishers for sale or local consumption (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa I’a taua e 20 laiti o loo fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo e faatau atu ma maua mai ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 11 _______________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 12_______________________________________ 3 _________________________________________ 13 _______________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 14_______________________________________ 5__________________________________________ 15_______________________________________ 6_________________________________________ 16_______________________________________ 7_________________________________________ 17_______________________________________ 8_________________________________________ 18_______________________________________ 9_________________________________________ 19_______________________________________ 10________________________________________ 20_______________________________________

7b. Name 6 reef and nearshore small finfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What action that can be done and by whom? Oa I’a laiti e 6 e fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom__________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

171

4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________5 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

8a. Name the 6 most important coastal and reef sharks caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village. Oa malie taua e 6 e faagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi e maua ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 4________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 6________________________________________

8b. Name 3 sharks that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa malie e 3 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9a. Name 4 important coastal and rays caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa fai e 4 o fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi ma maua mai ai tupe 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

9b. Name 2 nearshore rays that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom.Oa fai se 2 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

172

10a. Name 8 eels caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pusi taua e 8 o fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatau atu foi ma maua mai ai tupe? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

10b. Name 4 eels that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa pusi e 4 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

11a. List the three (3) most important sea snakes known by people in the village.

1______________________ 2____________________ 3______________________

11b. List one (1) type of sea snake that is now rare, extinct or in short supply; the reasons it is rare, extinct or in short supply; and the actions that need to be taken to protect or re-establish it. What can be done and by whom? 1___________________________ The reasons it is rare, extinct or in short supply___________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

12a. Name 4 octopus and squids caught by fishers for sale or consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa fe’e ma gufe’e e taua e 4 e fagotaina I le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa ma faatauatu foi ma maua mai ai tupe. 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

12b. Name 2 octopus and squids that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What can be done and by whom. Oa fe’e ma gufe’e se 2 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga poo ni fuafuaga e faasaoina ai nei I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

173

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

13a. What are 8 baitfish used by the fishers. Oa I’a e 8 e faaaoga mo maunu? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

13b. List down 4 baitfish that are now rare or become extinct and actions to manage and revive these and to be done by whom?Oa I’a maunu e 4 ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi? O iai ni gaioioga/fuafuaga e taumafai e tae maua ai pe faasao nei I’a maunu? Ae o ai e faatinoina nei gaioiga/fuafuaga?

1__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4__________________________________ What can be done and by whom_______________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

14a. List 8 important large reef and nearshore shellfish caught by fishers for sale and for consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa figota taua lapopoa e 8 o fagotaina mai le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa poo faatau atu foi?

1_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8 ________________________________________

14b. List 4 large reef and nearshore shellfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa figota lapopoa e 4 e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons__________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________

174

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

15a. List 8 important small reef and nearshore shellfish caught by fishers for sale and for consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa figota taua laiti e 8 o fagotaina mai le a’au ma le aloalo mo le taumafa poo faatau atu foi?

1_________________________________________ 5 ________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6 ________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7 ________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8 ________________________________________

15b. List 4 small reef and nearshore shellfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa figota laiti e 4 e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

16a. Name important crabs caught by fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pa’a e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

16b. Name important crabs that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa paa e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

175

17a. Name important lobsters caught by fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa pa’a e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

17b. Name important lobsters that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa ulasami e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

18a. Name 8 reef and nearshore holothurians/sea cucumbers caught for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa loli/maisu e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

8b. Name 4 sea cucumbers that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa loli/maisu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________

19a. Name 4 reef and coastal sea urchins caught by the fishers for sale and consumption in the village (indicate if sold by ‘s’ or ‘c’). Oa tuitui e fagotaina mo le taumafa ma faatau atu e maua I lo outou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

176

19b. Name 2 sea urchins that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa tuitui e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

20a. Name 4 reef and coastal sea stars/starfish found in the village. Oa aveau e maua I lo outou gataifale? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________ 20b.Name 2 sea stars/starfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa aveau e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

21a. Name 4 jellyfish that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa alualu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

21b. Name 2 jellyfish that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa alualu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

22a. Name 4 sea anemones that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa lumane/matamalu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

22b. Name 2 sea anemone that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa lumane/matamalu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________Reason______________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

177

23a. Name 4 sea weeds that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa limu e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

23b. Name 2 sea weeds that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa limu e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

24a. Name 4 sea slugs that fishers collect for consumption and for sale. Oa gau/gaupapa e fagotaina mo le taumafa poo le faatau atu foi e maua I lo outou nuu? 1_________________________________________ 3________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 4________________________________________

24b. Name 2 sea slugs that are rare or extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa gau/gaupapa e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina? 1 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2 _________________________________ Reasons _________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

25. List 2 types of sea worms caught by people in the village. Which are rare or extinct and why. What can be done to manage these and by whom. Oa anufe sami e maua I le a’au ma le aloalo ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasao ai ni figota ae o ai e/poo faatinoina?

1__________________________________ Reasons______________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________ Reasons___________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________

26. Name the plant poisons or other kind of poisons that are used for fishing finfish. Are these allowed or not in the country/village. What actions impose to control these and done by whom? Oa laau o’ona ma isi ituaiga vai oona e faaaogaina I faigafaiva? E faatagaina e le malo poo le nuu ia faigafaiva? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e taumafai e faasao ai ia I’a ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________

178

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 6___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

27a. List 8 coastal and sea birds seen in the village. Oa manu ma meaola se 8 e nonofo I nofoaga tu- matafaga o loo I lo tou nuu?

1_________________________________________ 5________________________________________ 2_________________________________________ 6________________________________________ 3_________________________________________ 7________________________________________ 4_________________________________________ 8________________________________________

27b. List 4 coastal and sea birds that are rare or now extinct and the reasons why. What strategies to manage these and to be done by whom. Oa manu ma meaola se 4 e nonofo I nofoaga tu- matafaga ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ai ia meaola ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________ Reasons_________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

28. What kind of fishing that various village people are involved in? (e.g. shellfish fishing). Oa ituaiga faigafaiva e faatinoina e tagata eseese I totonu o lo outou nuu?

1. Old men, chiefs/matai_________________________________________________________________ 2. Old women/chiefs’ wives______________________________________________________________ 3. Untitled men/aumaga_________________________________________________________________ 4. Young women/aualuma_______________________________________________________________ 5. Children___________________________________________________________________________

179

29. List the social and economical uses of corals and sand to the village people. Are these resources exploited or not. What management plans to maintain these resources? Oa aoga ma faaaogaina o le oneone ma amu e le tou nuu? Oa fuafuaga ma gaioiga o loo faaaogaina e faaaoga tatau ai nei mea taua?

1. Coral uses________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2. Sand uses___________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

30. List two (4) types of coral that are now rare, extinct or in short supply; the reasons why; and the actions that need to be taken to protect or re-establish these hard corals. Oa amu ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi ae pe aisea. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e faasaoina ia amu o le gataifale?

1___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________ Reason_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

31a. Explain the 5 most destructive fishing techniques that affect the marine ecosystem. What can be done and by whom. Oa faigafaiva se 5 e matua’I faatamaia ai I’a ma meaola o le sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ina ia faasaoina ai ma foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

180

31b. Explain the 5 most destructive fishing techniques that affect the coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom. Oa faigafaiva se 5 e matua’I faatamaia ai le gataifale (laau ma meaola tu-matafaga? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ina ia faasaoina ai ma foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________ Explain what can be done and by whom____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

32. Explain other coastal and nearshore marine resources that people use (handicraft or others) and are these resources in the abundant or in short supply? Oa nisi mea aoga mai le gataifale e faaaogaina e tagata? O tumau pea pe ua tau le toe maua ia mea aoga taua? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

33. Explain 6 main impacts of farming/agriculture on finfish. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga taua se 6 o faatoaga o aafia ai I’a? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom_______________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

181

34. Explain 6 main impacts of farming/agriculture on shellfish. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga taua se 6 o faatoaga o aafia ai figota? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

6___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

35. Explain impacts of agriculture on other marine organisms/resources. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga o faatoaga o aafia ai nisi meaola se ono (6) o le gataifale/sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

36. Explain 4 main household impacts/waste on finfish. What can be done and by whom. Faamatala mai ni aafiaga se fa e afua mai otaota mai aiga ma laoa o loo aafia ai I’a o le sami. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

182

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

37. Explain 4 main household impacts/wastes on shellfish. What can be done and by whom? Faamatala mai ni aafiaga se fa (4) e afua mai otaota mai aiga ma laoa o loo aafia ai figota o le sami. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by who____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

38. Explain household impacts/wastes on other marine organisms/resources and the coastal ecosystem. What can be done and by whom. Oa aafiaga e afua mai otaota I maota ma laoa o aafia ai isi meaola o le gataifale/sami? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e ona foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina? 1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

39. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (roads) have on the nearshore marine and the coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom? Oa ni aafiaga of auala o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

183

What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

40. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (seawall) have on the nearshore marine and coastal ecosystem/biodiversity. What can be done and by whom? Oa ni aafiaga o taligalu o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale. Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina?

1___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

41. Explain the impacts that infrastructural developments (dam) have on the marine resources. What can be done and by whom? Oa aafiaga o le afi/hydro-power I Afulilo o aafia ai I’a, figota, isi meaola o le sami, amu ma le matafaga poo le gataifale? Oa ni gaioiga/fuafuaga e foia ai ia faafitauli ae o ai e faatinoina? 1_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

184

5___________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ 6_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

42. Name nearshore marine species that are rare or become extinct after the implementation of the dam. Explain how. What strategies used/done and by whom? Oa meola/I’a o le sami ua tau le maua pe ua le toe maua foi talu ona fausia le afi I Afulilo? Oa ni gaioiga e mafai ai ona foia ia faafitauli ma faasaoina ia meaola? Ae o ai e faatinoina ia fuafuaga?

1. Finfish/explain______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Shellfish/explain_____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Others/explain_______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Coastal environment/plants/animals________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________What can be done and by whom___________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

43. Explain traditional management plans, rules and taboos used or are practiced for conservation of marine and coastal ecosystems and biodiversity.Faamatala pe oa ni gaioiga, tulafono, tapu faa-samoa sa iai sa/ma ona puipuia ai le gataifale (coast/marine). ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 44. Explain punishments impose by the village on individuals concerning the rules and taboos on marine resource managements. Faamatala ni faasalaga e faasala ai I latou e solia ia sa ma tulafono a le nuu e faatatau I le gataifale. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

45. Explain how the government and NGOs are supporting the people in managing their coastal ecosystems and marine resources? Faamatala pe o iai ma e faapefea foi ona fesoasoani le malo ma isi ofisa o siosiomaga I le tou nuu ma ona tagata I le faasaoina ma le vaaia lelei o le gataifale. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

185

APPENDIX II – LIST OF SPECIES

Coastal plants identified as important by respondents at the study villages

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name TreesFau Beach hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceusFutu Fish-poison tree Barringtonia asiaticaNiu Coconut Cocos nuciferaMilo Pacific rosewood Thespesia populneaTalie Tropical almond Terminalia samoensis

Terminalia catappaFetau Alexandrian laurel Calophyllum inophyllumPu’a Chinese-lantern tree Hernandia nymphaeifoliaLeva Cerbera Cerbera manghasGatae Coral tree Erythrina variegataIfi Tahitian chestnut Inocarpus fagiferFu’afu’a Guest tree Kleinhovia hospitaFao Neisosperma Neisosperma oppositifoliumTogo Oriental mangrove or

Red mangrove Bruguiera gymnorrhizaRhizophora mangle

Pulu Indian banyan? Ficus benghalensisPualulu Pua Fagraea berteroanaIfilele Intsia bijugaTausuni Tree heliotrope Tournefortia argenteaMati Dyer’s fig Ficus tinctoria/sabraPu’a vai Pisonia Pisonia grandisLama Candlenut Aleurites moluccanaShrubsLala Dendrolobium umbellatumNonu Indian mulberry Morinda citrifoliaFisoa Colubrina asiaticaFasa/laufala Screwpine Pandanus tectoriusTi Ti plant Cordyline fruticosaAloalo tai/suni-a –tai Beach privet Clerodendrum inermeAteate Beach sunflower Wollastonia bifloraPaogo Pandanus Pandanus turritusLaau failafa Candlebush Senna alataAloalo Premma Premna serratifoliaGau Island myrtle Alyxia stellataLaumafiafia Wax plant Hoya australisNamulega Beach vitex Vitex trifoliaMasame Glochidion ramiflorumVines/WeedsFue sina Beach pea Vigna marinaFue moa Beach morning glory Ipomoea pes-capraeTifa St. Thomas bean Entada phaseoloidesTogotogo Asiatic pennywort Centella asiaticaFernsLau auta Scented fern Phymatosorus grossus

186

Marine species identified by respondents at the study villages

Samoan Name Common Name Scientific Name Large finfishes Anae Mullet Valamugil spp.

Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscusMugil cephalus

Filoa Ambon emperor Lethrinus amboinensis/olivaceusLaea Parrotfish Scarus spp.SapoanaeMalauli/Ulua

Trevallies Caranx spp.,Uraspis secundaCarangoides spp.

Ume Unicornfish Naso spp.Galo H/Parrotfish Scarus gibbus??Lalafutu Pompana/dart Trachinotus sp.Mat mu/Mu matavaivai Bigeye emperor Monotaxis grandoculusMalatea/Tagafa Humphead maori wrasse Cheilinus undulatesPalani >15cm Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp.Ta’ulaia Dot-tail Goatfish Parupeneus indicusUlapo Parrotfish Hipposcarus longicepsAta’ata

Gatala moana

Grouper Coral trout P/grouper

Epinephelus septemfasciatusPlectropomus leopardusCephalopholis argus

Taiva Onespot Snapper Lutjanus monostigmaMala’i Humpback snapper Lutjanus gibbusMalava Rabbitfish Siganus argenteusA’u/Ise Long-tom Platybelone argalus platyuraMu Twinspot red snapper Lutjanus boharGanue Rudderfish Kyphosus spp.Koko Moonfish Lampris guttatusSumulaulau Green Triggerfish Pseudobalistes flavimarginatusSaosao Great barracuda Agrioposphyraena barracudaAva Milkfish Chanos chanosAli Flounder Samariscus triocellatusFiloa-muFiloa

Emperors Gymnocranius spp.Lethrinus spp.

Moana Goatfish Parupeneus spp.Sapat Barracudas Sphyraena spp.Papa Lunartail Cod Variola loutiUme aleva Filefish Aluterus scriptusPatagaloa Surge wrasse Thalassoma purpureumSmall Finfishes Alogo Surgeonfish Acanthurus spp.Manini Convict surgeonfish Acanthurus triostegusPone <15cm - Pala’ia-juveniles Bristle-toothed surgeonfish Ctenochaetus striatusFuga Parrotfish Scarus spp.Gatala Groupers/cod Epinephelus spp.Pa’u’ulu/kiko/Lo Rabbitfishes Siganus spp.Malau/tamalau Squirrelfishes

Soldierfishes

Flammeo spp.Sargocentron spp.Myripristis spp.

187

Tifitifi

Alosina

Butterfly fishes Chaetodon spp.Forcipiger spp.Hemitaurichthys polylepisHeniochus spp.

Tu’u’u

Tu’u’u/MamoMutu

Gregories

DamselfishesSergeant-majors Pullers

Pygoplites diacanthusPomacanthus imperatorAbudefdul spp.Amblyglyphidodon leucogasterStegastes spp.Chromis spp.

Mata’ele’ele Emperors Lethrinus spp.Lupo <8cm Jacks Carangidae

Seriola rivolianaScomberoides commersonianus

Aua 8-12cm Mullets Valamugil spp.Liza spp.Crenimugil crenilabisChaenomugil leuciscus

Vete/I’asinaMatulau/AfuluUla’oa

Goatfish Mulloidichthys spp.Paruepeneus spp.Upeneus spp.

Matu Silver biddy Gerris oyenaAtule Purse-eye Scad Selar crumenophthalmus

Decapterus spp.Matala’oa/Taiva Mala’i/Tamala

Black snapper Snappers

Macolor nigerAphareus spp.Aprion virescensEtelis spp.Lutjanus spp.Pristipomoides spp.Paracaesio spp.

Sumu Triggerfish Balistapus undulatusBalistoides cnspicillumRhinecanthus aculeatus

Lalafi Maori wrasse Cheilinus spp.Ili’ilia <15cm Unicornfish Naso lituatusPa’umal Filefishes Amanses spp.Pelupelu Herring Sardinella spp.

Doussumiera acutaHerklotsichthys quadrimaculatusSpratelloides spp.

Sal Samoan anchovy Stolephorus apiensisPinel (juveniles) Rabbitfish Siganus spp.Sugale Wrass Halichoeres hartzfeldii

Hemigymnus fasciatusThalassoma spp.Labroides spp.Anampses spp.Bodianus spp.Coris spp.Epibulus insideatarMacropharyngodon meleagris

Apoa Eel catfish Plotosus anguillarisGatala Groupers/Cods Cephalopholis spp.

Plectropomus leopardus

188

Sue Puffers/Tobies Canthigaster spp.Arothron spp.

Tautu Porcupinefish Diodon spp.Ava’ava Terapon perch Terapon jarbuaTolo Flatheads Platycephalidae (5spp.)NofuSausauleleLa’otele

ScorpionfishLionfishReef stonefish

Scorpaenopsis cirrhosaPterois volitansSynanceia verrucosa

Mumu Ponyfishes

Goldline bream

Leiognathus spp.Gazza minutaGnathodentex aureolineatus

Igaga?Tivao

Tivao-sugale

Monocle bream Butterfly bream Whiptail

Scolopsis trilineatusNemipterus sp.Pentapodus sp.

Moamoa Trunkfishes/Boxfishes

Lactoria cornutaOstracion tuberculatumOstracium lentiginosum

Maogo White-spotted surgeonfish Acanthurus guttatusSharksMoemoeao/Miliga Black-tip reef sharks Nabrius ferrugineusMataitaliga Scalloped Hammerhead Sphyrna lewiniTa’aneva Spotted nurse shark Stegostoma fasciatumAso Mackerel shark Isurus oxyrinchusRaysFai pe’a Spotted eagle ray Aetobatis narinariFai pala? Coachwhip stingray Himantura fai?Fai malie Manta ray Manta birostrisFai gatae? Fai tala Blue spot Stingray Dasyatis kuhliiMoray eels & snakes Aiaiuga Starry moray eel Echidna nebulosaPusi gatala/Maoa’e Giant moray eel Gymnothorax javanicusOnea Banded sea snake Laticauda colubrinusTafilautalo Yellow margin moray eel Gymnothorax flavimarginatusI’aui Conger eel Conger cinereusAuvaeloloa Moray eel Enchelycore schismatorhynchusGatamea Snake eels Myrichthus spp.Gata sami/Galio Sea snake Pelamis platurusSoloalalo Sea snake LaticaudaLarge shellfish Faisua Clam Tridacna spp.Foafoa/Saosao? Triton trumpet shell Charonia tritonisPala’au Spider conch shells Lambis spp.Small shellfishPipiPipit

Violet asaphis Asaphis violaceaAsaphis rugosa

Sisi Freshwater and nerite snails Neritina and Nerita spp.Alili Turban shells Turbo chrysostomusAliao Top shell Tectus pyramisFole Pen shells Pinna spp.Tugane Venus clam Gafrarium sp.Pule Tiger cowry

CowryCypraea tigrisCypraea spp.

189

Pae Ark shell Anadara sp.Tapula’a Turban Turbo sp.Fatuaua Thorny oyster Spondylus spp.Li Surf clam Atactodea striataMatapisu Limpets Patelloida sp., Cellana sp.Tio Rock oyster Crassostrea mordaxAsi/Matatuai Arc shells/ cockles Vasticardium sp.Panea Olive shell Strombus gibberulusAsi’asi Scallop shell PectinidaeTifa Black-lip pearl oyster Pinctada margaritiferaPatupatu Vase shell VasidaeU’u Brown mussel Modiolus sp.Sea hares and Sea slugsGau Green sea hare Dolabella auriculariaGaupapa Sea slug OnchidiumMatefanau Sea hare Aplysia sp.Octopus and Squids Fe’e (avevalu) Octopus Octopus sp.Gufe’e Cuttlefish Sepia sp.Sea-cucumberFugafuga Brown sandfish Bohadschia mamorataLoli Lollyfish

Blackfish Holothuria atraActinopyga miliaris

Greenfish Maisu Stichopus chloronatusMama’o Surf redfish Actinopyga mauritiana

Actinopyga echinitesNeti Curryfish Stichopus variegatesSea amu’u Pinkfish Holothuria edulisSea mao’i Pricklyfish Stichopus horrensPeva synaptid Synapta maculataUlutunu Leopardfish Bohadschia argusSea-urchins Tuitui Boring urchin Echinometra matthaeiVaga Long spine urchin Diadema setosumSava’e/Satula Short-spine sea urchin Tripneustes gratillaOfaofa Heart urchin Brissus latecarinatus?Sea Stars Aveau moana Blue starfish Linckia laevigataAveau (fa’aatualoa) Serpent star Ophiocoma sp.Aveau (aloalo) Common starfish Archaster typicusAlamea Crown of thorn Acanthaster planciPalutu Pincushion star Culcita granulatusJellyfishAlualu Upside-down jellyfish Casseopea sp.Sea anemone Matalelei Sea anemone Zoanthus sp.Lumane Sea anemone Stoichactis sp.SeaweedsLimu a’au Seaweed Halymenia durvilleiLimu fuafua Seaweed/sea grape Caulerpa racemosaSea worms Atoaloa sami Giant bristle worm Eunice sp.Palolo Palolo worm Eunice viridisMoloasi Boring peanut worm?

190

191

Ipo Peanut worm SiphonosomaaustraleCrabsAmaama Grapsid crab Grapsus sp.Pa’alimago Mangrove crab Scylla serrataTutu/kuku Red spotted crab Carpilius maculatusVaevaeuli Black-claw reef crab Etisus sp.?Tupa Land/Beach crab Cardisoma carnifexMatamea Red-eye crab Eriphia sebanaU’a Red-claw land crab Sesarma erythrodactylaAvi’ivi’i Ghost crab Ocypoda ceratophthalmusTupu-o-pa’a? Pa’atala Spiny swimmer crab Thalamita sp

.Tapola Burrowing crab Calappa sp.

Coconut crab Birgus latroSa’esa’e Poisonous shawl crab Zozymus?

Ataula Fiddler crab Uca sp.Lobsters Ula Spiny lobsters Panulirus penicillatus

Panulirus sp.Panulirus versicolor

Papata Slipper lobster Parribacus sp.Ulavai Freshwater shrimp Macrobrachium lar

Palaemon sp.Stony corals Amu’amu/feofeo? Staghorn coral Acropora spp. (branching)Tu/Puga Massive coral Porites spp.Lapa Plate coral Acropora (tabulate)Punau Stinging/fire coral MilleporaAmu ula Red coral Stylaster

Pavona cactus?Solitary corals Fungia?Blue coral?

Soft corals AlcyonariaAmu galemulemu Sarcophyton trochiliophorum?