Graaf, M. de

Knowledge on the density, distribution and occurrence of whales and dolphins in the Caribbean Netherlands is sparse. This knowledge is needed as basic input for conservation and management of cetaceans in the area. Especially in the long term, dedicated data is needed to provide a base-line for monitoring the effect of policy decisions, such as a proposed implementation of a whale sanctuary.

Until recently, knowledge was mainly based on strandings and opportunistic sightings of whales and dolphins. Dedicated data collection, such as obtained from designed aerial or shipboard surveys, will provide reliable and unbiased estimates of abundances and describe distribution patterns and habitat use. However, these types of studies are costly. To explore options on how to bridge the gap between costs (high-low) and data quality (high-low), we investigated a method that could potentially provide long term and cost effective, albeit low quality (in certain aspects), data. In this report we present the results obtained using a port sampling programme used to monitor the fisheries of Saba, St. Eustatius and Bonaire.
During port sampling fishermen were interviewed after returning to the harbour from a fishing trip. The fishermen described their fishing activities and in addition they reported any sightings of whales or dolphins. The study on Saba has included the recording of cetacean sightings since July 2012, the same method has been applied in St. Eustatius since November 2012 and on Bonaire since January 2014. In total 59 different fishing vessels participated in the study (9 Saba, 15 St. Eustatius and 35 Bonaire). The waters around each island were divided into sub-areas to provide data on where the fishing effort took place and where sightings were made. Effort was described as "fishing trips" per sub-area, per month and per island. A total of 1428 days at sea were monitored, with 1020 from Saba, 292 from St. Eustatius and 116 from Bonaire.
During the study a total of 42 whale sightings of 71 individuals was made, of these 36 (62 animals) were recorded in Saba, 2 (2 animals) in St. Eustatius and 4 (4 animals) in Bonaire. There were 93 dolphin sightings consisting of 1362 individual animals. Of these, from Saba there were 71 sightings (877 animals), from St Eustatius 3 sightings (144 animals) and from Bonaire 19 sightings (341 animals).
The relative density (sightings per "fishing trip") showed a pronounced difference in occurrence of cetaceans between islands. The highest relative density of dolphins was found in Bonaire with 0.16 dolphin sightings/fishing trip. The highest relative density of whales was found in Saba with 0.04 whales/fishing trip. Occurrence of whales and dolphins indicated seasonal patterns, in particular for Saba waters where the monitoring ran for several years and most whale and dolphin sightings were in March. The spatial distribution in the Saba study area indicated that dolphins occur regularly on the Saba Bank. In Bonaire the data indicated that an area on the west side of the island and close to shore (<1 km) with high fishing effort also had a high occurrence of cetacean sightings.
An evaluation of the method used indicated that the sampling methodology could be adapted to improve data quality. Most important hereby is a standardization of data collection and data storage between the islands. It also showed that the information provided by the fishermen is very useful in identifying areas of research needed to further investigate cetacean distributional patterns and habitat use around these three islands.
This research was performed within EZ-program Beleidsondersteunend Onderzoek (BO). BO-11-011.05- 034, BO-11-011-05-008. 

In the past, diseases and infections have had dramatic impacts on Caribbean coral reef ecosystems (e.g. white band disease in corals (Pantos and Bythell, 2006); mass mortality of the sea urchin Diadema (Lessions, 2005)). Regular monitoring of reef organisms for signs of disease and infections may be important as an “early warning system” to possibly prevent devastating outbreaks. 
In September 2013 an unusual number of reef fish species (e.g. Scaridae (Fig. 1.1 , Acanthuridae and Pomacanthidae) infected with dermal parasites were observed during a dive at Salt Pier (M. de Graaf, pers. obs.). In September 2014 one princess parrotfish infected with dermal parasites was dissected and internal and external samples were send to the Central Veterinairy Institute (CVO) in Lelystad (Netherlands) for further histopathological examination. According to CVO the parrotfish suffered from a microspore parasitic infection of the skin, muscles and digestive tract. The cysts caused fibrotic abscesses and necrosis on the fins.

Similar dermal parasites were observed in a recent survey of coral reef fishes on Curaçao and the observed external blemishes were associated with infections by trematodes (digenean metacercaria), turbellarians and protozoans (Cryptocaryon) (Bernal et al., 2015). Bernal et al. (2015) reported that infection rates of coral reef fish on Curacao were almost ten times higher compared to infection rates of coral reef fish surveyed in Mexico and Belize. To date, only anecdotal observations exist of parasite infections on coral reef fish on Bonaire but no quantitative assessment of the prevalence of dermal parasites is available. 
The objective of the Helpdeskvraag was to:
1) conduct a “quick scan” to determine the current prevalence of dermal parasites among the coral reef fish of Bonaire, and

2) advise EZ on possible consequences and future actions depending on the outcome of the “quick scan”. 

Quantitative habitat mapping and description form the basis for understanding the provisioning of ecosystem services and habitat connectivity, and hence provide an essential underpinning for marine spatial planning, management and conservation. Based on 869 video stations in a 150 x 200 m grid, we mapped 25.3 km2 of the near-shore island shelf of St. Eustatius at depths ranging 5-30 m. This yielded a coarse-grained map of the principal habitat classes of St. Eustatius’ seascapes. A total of nine principal seafloor habitats were distinguished. Gorgonian reefs amounted to 22% of the Statia Marine Park habitats sampled and were concentrated in the shallow wave-exposed eastern parts of the island (7.7 m average depths). The densest coral “scapes” and seagrass beds of St. Eustatius were concentrated at depths of about 24 m and only amounted to 4 and 5 percent resp. of the island shelf habitats studied. Whereas coral areas were essentially limited to the southern and south-western island shelf areas, seagrass beds were confined to the northern island shelf area. Including patch reef habitats, total hard coral-scape habitat for the St. Eustatius Marine Park amounted to about 19% of the area surveyed and about 475 ha of habitat. Sargassum reef habitat typically occurred at the seaward edge of communities dominated by hard coral growth.

In the Dutch Caribbean EEZ, at least 27 elasmobranch species have been documented. Of these, 9 are listed as “critically endangered” and 8 as “near threatened” by the IUCN. Elasmobranchs are not a target fishery in the Dutch Caribbean, but do occur as bycatch in artisanal fisheries. Sharks are considered nuisance species by fishermen. Most sharks caught are not discarded, but consumed locally, used as bait, or (reportedly) killed and discarded at sea on the two islands where landing of sharks is illegal (Bonaire and St. Maarten). Based on recent data, published sport diver accounts, and anecdotal accounts, it is clear that shark populations in most areas of the Dutch Caribbean have been strongly depleted in the last half century.

The National Nature Policy Plan 2001-2005 (NPP-5) and its current status of implementation was assessed as a first step towards a new Nature Policy Plan for the Caribbean Netherlands (Bonaire, Saba, St. Eustatius). The purpose of this exercise is to determine which action points of NPP-5 are still relevant, and to identify key new developments to be aware of when setting goals and strategies for the new Nature Policy Plan for the Caribbean Netherlands. The NPP-5 was the first formal nature policy plan of the Netherlands Antilles. It lists a total of 47 policy goals and projects in the text for the period 2001-2005. Based on these, 61 action points were listed in an Action Matrix for the period 2001-2005. Of these 31 were achieved to a high degree of completion between 2001 and 2010, notwithstanding the serious and chronic lack of both funds and manpower (NEPP-7). Based on this assessment, a total of 40 action points may be brought forward based on the NPP-5. These not only include most “one-time” action points not yet achieved but also several action points that were achieved but which are of an on-going nature.

While much has been achieved in terms of policy development and legal frameworks over the last 10 years, climate change implies that future nature management will be confronted with an increasingly rapid succession of major ecological problems such as coral bleaching, hurricane impacts, and invading species.

Our quick-scan assessment showed that policy development over the last 10 years has suffered significantly from challenges in terms of both capacity and funding, as well as in decision-making in reaching its goals. Controversial topics regarding “rules and regulations”, “cooperation”, and “financial instruments” largely failed to be achieved due to problems in the decision making process, whereas less controversial action points such as “reporting”, drawing up “plans”, doing “research” and “education”, especially suffered from a lack of capacity and funding.

Several main topics are identified that will need attention in the new nature management plan. The new nature policy will have to meet standard and basic policy needs, information and management needs, and also have to accommodate the latest conceptual developments and the pressing realities of global climate change and alien species invasions. Notable is that a large number of new and serious threats have come to the forefront since the NPP-5 was set 10 years ago.

Because the diverse, colourful and unique natural ecosystems of the Caribbean Netherlands also represent the single most important local economic resource on which to build long-term prosperity of the inhabitants of these islands, the nature policy plan needs to be recognized as much more than simply a way to protect nature and avert ecological crisis. It is in fact a key policy tool by which to actively safeguard and create economic well-being and opportunity for these islands.

The National Nature Policy Plan 2001-2005 (NPP-5) and its current status of implementation was assessed as a first step towards a new Nature Policy Plan for the Caribbean Netherlands (Bonaire, Saba, St. Eustatius). The purpose of this exercise is to determine which action points of NPP-5 are still relevant, and to identify key new developments to be aware of when setting goals and strategies for the new Nature Policy Plan for the Caribbean Netherlands. The NPP-5 was the first formal nature policy plan of the Netherlands Antilles. It lists a total of 47 policy goals and projects in the text for the period 2001- 2005. Based on these, 61 action points were listed in an Action Matrix for the period 2001-2005. Of these 31 were achieved to a high degree of completion between 2001 and 2010, notwithstanding the serious and chronic lack of both funds and manpower (NEPP-7). Based on this assessment, a total of 40 action points may be brought forward based on the NPP-5. These not only include most “one-time” action points not yet achieved but also several action points that were achieved but which are of an on-going nature.

While much has been achieved in terms of policy development and legal frameworks over the last 10 years, climate change implies that future nature management will be confronted with an increasingly rapid succession of major ecological problems such as coral bleaching, hurricane impacts, and invading species.

Our quick-scan assessment showed that policy development over the last 10 years has suffered significantly from challenges in terms of both capacity and funding, as well as in decision-making in reaching its goals. Controversial topics regarding “rules and regulations”, “cooperation”, and “financial instruments” largely failed to be achieved due to problems in the decision making process, whereas less controversial action points such as “reporting”, drawing up “plans”, doing “research” and “education”, especially suffered from a lack of capacity and funding.

Several main topics are identified that will need attention in the new nature management plan. The new nature policy will have to meet standard and basic policy needs, information and management needs, and also have to accommodate the latest conceptual developments and the pressing realities of global climate change and alien species invasions. Notable is that a large number of new and serious threats have come to the forefront since the NPP-5 was set 10 years ago.

Because the diverse, colourful and unique natural ecosystems of the Caribbean Netherlands also represent the single most important local economic resource on which to build long-term prosperity of the inhabitants of these islands, the nature policy plan needs to be recognized as much more than simply a way to protect nature and avert ecological crisis. It is in fact a key policy tool by which to actively safeguard and create economic well-being and opportunity for these islands. 

On the 10th of October 2010 the governmental entity known as the Netherlands Antilles is scheduled to cease to exist. Each island will aquire a new status within the kingdom. Following the declaration of an Exclusive Fishery Zone (EFZ) in 1993, an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) has been declared in the Dutch Caribbean on the tenth of June 2010.

The EEZ area concerned, is a large expanse of sea which harbours exceptional biodiversity, and represents an important natural renewable resource potential. The Netherlands Antilles, Aruba and The Netherlands have, therefore, opted to draft a management plan for the EEZ. This initiative began in the year 2005 when the first conference regarding the management of the biodiversity in the EEZ was held. The consensus was that despite a fragmented Dutch Caribbean, the EEZ should always be integrally managed. In 2009 the participants of the second conference confirmed the need for common management and developed common goals, principles and a framework for the management of the Dutch Caribbean waters. Resulting from this conference a management plan was drafted, circulated to all stakeholders and discussed on the 1st of June 2010. Based on the input and feedback received, as well as subsequent correspondence, this final management plan was jointly developed.

The Dutch Ministery of Agriculture, Nature, and Food Quality (LNV) gave financial support to facilitate the process. This management plan initially stems from the framework policy plan “Natuurbeleid van de Nederlandse Antillen” (2000) that recognized the urgent need for a management plan for the Saba Bank, situated inside the EFZ waters, to ensure sustainable fisheries and protection of its rich biodiversity. It also closely follows the intention of the Kingdom with regards to the goals set forth in the Dutch biodiversity policy programme “Beleidsprogramma Biodiversiteit 2008-2011”. In this respect, as a party to the Convention on Biodiversity, The Netherlands also has a strong international commitment to help stem the global decline in biodiversity.

This management plan outlines the purposes and manner in which the Caribbean Exclusive Economic Zone and Saba Bank in particular may be used in a sustainable manner, based on a shared vision and common set of goals. It outlines the management objectives, as well as key policies, and strategies with which to achieve sustainable management. It also addresses the administrative structure, resource use, financial support, key information needs, and action points most urgently required to set sustainable management in place.

To set the stage for implementation and properly initiate this process governments of The Netherlands Antilles, Aruba and The Netherlands have, among others resolved to:

1. take those steps needed to legally designate the Saba bank as a specially protected national marine area,
2. take all steps necessary to legally designate the Dutch Caribbean EEZ as a Marine Mammal Sanctuary,
3. install a EEZ Marine Resourses Committee to guide the process of further management implementation and
4. allocate the required core funding.

These important intentions are formalized and set in action by means of an agreement between parties.