Ecological and Socioeconomic Assessment of Mombasa Marine Park

1
Ecological and Socio-economic Assessment of
Mombasa Marine Park Reserve, Kenya

• by
• Cosmas Nzaka MUNGA
• Promoters
• Prof. Dr. Ann VANREUSEL
• Dr. David OBURA
• Co-promoter
• Prof. Dr. Farid DAHDOUH-GUEBAS

2
Introduction

• Global overview
• Marine Park and Reserve - MPA, important
  strategy for conservation of marine biodiversity
  and productivity
• Implemented as a tool for fishery managment
• As a form of ecosystem-based management approach
  involving interaction of marine resources with
  various resource users

3
Introduction cont..

• In Kenya
• Marine Park - Strictly no-take zone, tourism
  and research activities
• Marine Reserve - partial exploitation, artisanal
  fishing
• The challenge of MMPR is to balance conservation
  and sustainable resource use
• Ecological and socio-economic monitoring becomes
  handy in gathering information about the status
  of the MPA
• Thus in 2004 monitoring was introduced

4
Broad objective

• To determine performance of MMPR using four year
  monitoring data
• Specific Objectives
• To determine the trends in composition and
  abundance of selected benthic fauna and flora,
  fish and invertebrates of the coral reef
  community
• To assess the socio-economic impact of the MPA on
  the local community resource users
• To look for recommendations in relation to the
  socio-ecological management of the MPA

5

Materials and Methods
Study area
6
Materials and Methods cont..
Park Reserve Monitoring

• Ecological data
• benthic cover
• Fish invert. densities

• Socio-economic data
• Users economic condition
• Mngt regime perception

Data analysis interpretation for
socio-ecological change
7
Results and Discussion
Average fish densities per protection per 250m²
8
Results and Discussion Cont..
Average fish densities per site per 250m²
9
Results and Discussion cont..
Average fish density per season per 250m²
10
Results and Discussion cont..
Average fish density per year per 250m²
11
Results and Discussion cont..
Average benthic percentage cover per protection
12
Results and Discussion cont..
Average benthic percentage cover per site
13
Results and Discussion cont..
Average benthic percentage cover per season
14
Results and Discussion cont..
Averaege benthic percenatage cover per year
15
Results and Discussion cont..
Resource users age and years worked
16
Results and Discussion cont..
Kshs 65 1 US
Average profit per day per resource user
17
Conclusion

• Fish densities
• Fish densities varied with protection and season
• Yearly trend in fish densities shows fluctuation
• Labridea (wrasses) density was highest in both
  the Park and Reserve
• Percentage benthic cover
• benthic cover varies with protection and season
• benthic cover was highest for algal turf in the
  MPA
• Yearly trend in benthic cover shows fluctuation
  except for the algal turf

18
Conclusion cont..

• Resource use
• The MPA has attracted both direct and indirect
  resource users

19
Recommendation

• Although this data presents a relative short term
  of monitoring, the following can be deduced
• The dominance of algal turf in the MPA is a sign
  of nutrient enrichment. Possible nutrient sources
  to be studied include the two creeks bordering
  the MPA
• The Park provides a refujia for the fish

20
Thank you for your time!!