State of the Sunda Banda Seascape

State of the Sunda Banda Seascape Marine Protected Area Network - 2017 Summary Report

Cover photo Designer

: Beginer Subhan : Anargha Setiadi

Suggested citation : Setyawan, E., Estradivari, Andradi-Brown, D. A., Amkieltiela, Anggraeni, D., Claborn, K., Damora, A., De-Nardo, M., Dyahapsari, I., Firmansyah, F., Glew, L., Handayani, C.N.N., Tarigan, S.A., Welly, M., Campbell, S., Cox, C, Mustofa, I. Z., Nanlohy, H., Pardede, S., Santiadji, V., Timisela, N., Wisesa, N., Wijonarno, A., Wirasanjaya, Yusuf, M, and Ahmadia, G. N. 2018. State of the Sunda Banda Seascape Marine Protected Area Network – 2017, Summary Report. World Wildlife Fund, University of Pattimura, Wildlife Conservation Society, Coral Triangle Centre, RARE. Washington D.C., United States, Jakarta and Bali, Indonesia. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.6397292

2

© TRINITY / WWF INDONESIA

State of the Sunda Banda Seascape Marine Protected Area Network - 2017 Summary Report

INTRODUCTION The Sunda Banda Seascape (SBS; Fig. 1)—located within the Coral Triangle and Indonesia— forms part of the global epicenter of tropical marine biodiversity; it is home to over 2,100 reef fish species (Allen and Werner, 2002) and over 500 coral species (Veron et al. 2009). The SBS region covers 151 million ha, contains approximately 5,000 islands (BPS-Statistics Indonesia, 2017), and has coral reef, mangrove, and seagrass areas of 1,020,331 ha, 191,827 ha, and 75,657 ha respectively. It is comprised of three subseascapes: (i) the Lesser Sunda Subseascape (LSS), (ii) the Southern Eastern Sulawesi Subseascape (SESS), and (iii) the Inner Banda Arc Subseascape (IBAS).

Conditions, (2) Human Well-Being, (3) Ecosystem Health, (4) Fish and Fisheries, and (5) Governance. While each indicator was evaluated at MPA level, in this summary report we present results at the subseascape level. Each indictor is evaluated and scored in one of three categories: ‘above average/optimal’, ‘average/ acceptable’, and ‘below average/below optimal’. Please see the full report for individual MPA level results and the full scoring criteria (Setyawan et al. 2018).

There has been a rapid increase in the number of SBS MPAs since 2008 © TAUFIK ABDILLAH / WWF INDONESIA

One may consider the coral reefs of Koon MPA as among the healthier ecosystems in the SBS region.

Figure 1. Sunda Banda Seascape (SBS) region in Central and Eastern Indonesia

Consisting of around 5,000 small islands and three subseascapes, the SBS region covers 151 million ha of area.

4

Unfortunately, Indonesia’s marine resources face increasing anthropogenic damage, with destructive fishing and overexploitation of marine resources as the primary pressures (Burke et al. 2012). As the SBS region is considered a top conservation priority for Indonesia, the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) has rapidly increased the number and extent of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the SBS since 2008. As of December 2017, a total of 85 MPAs have been initiated/established in the SBS region, covering 9.6 million ha. These MPAs were developed with multiple objectives, including both biodiversity protection and promoting sustainable fisheries and livelihoods. Of these 85 MPAs, 44 are managed by MMAF and 41 are managed by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF). This SBS dashboard provides a science-based assessment of 22 MPA status indicators grouped within five domains capturing different aspects of MPA effectiveness and current ecological and social conditions as of 2017. Domains are: (1) Enabling

5

STATUS OF CONDITIONS 2017 LSS SESS IBAS ENABLING CONDITIONS

STATUS OF CONDITIONS 2017 LSS SESS IBAS ECOSYSTEM HEALTH Hard coral cover

Sufficient habitats in MPAs

Percentage of healthy hard coral cover (%)

Proportion of critical habitats protected within MPAs

Mangrove cover

Spacing between MPAs within MPA network

Coverage of mangrove cover within MPAs (ha)

Number of MPAs within 100 km distance

Seagrass cover Coverage of seagrass cover within MPAs (ha)

Non-extractive critical habitats

FISH AND FISHERIES

The proportion of critical habitats within NTZs in MPAs

Biomass of key fisheries species

Perceived threats to marine resource*

Biomass of key fisheries species (Lutjanidae, Haemulidae, and Serranidae)

Number of perceived threats to marine resource identified by locals

Biomass of herbivorous fish

Management capacity and resources

Biomass of herbivorous fish (Siganidae, Scaridae, and Acanthuridae)

The proportion of fulfilled E-KKP3K** indicators related to management capacity, resources, and facilities

Fishing pressure The 90th quantile of fish size in each MPA (cm)

Clearly defined boundaries

CPUE

Proportion of fulfilled E-KKP3K** indicators related to zoning system and plan

Catch Per Unit Effort

GOVERNANCE

HUMAN WELL-BEING

Participation in decision making* Proportion of identified user groups who participate in establishing marine resource use rules within the MPA

Economic well-being* Household asset index Health*

Resource use rules*

Food security index

Number of rules associated to habitats and species

Political empowerment*

Conflict resolution*

Marine tenure index

Time required to resolve conflict over local marine resource

Education*

User participation in monitoring and enforcement*

School enrolment rate Culture*

Households that are member of organization in managing marine resources

Place attachment index Above average/Optimal

* Small sample size (5 MPAs)

6

Hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) are widely distributed on reefs in the SBS region.

© EVI NURUL IHSAN / WWF INDONESIA

SBS MPA NETWORK: DASHBOARD

Average/Acceptable

Below average/below optimal

No data

** EKKP3K: Efektivitas Pengelolaan Kawasan Konservasi Perairan, Pesisir dan Pulau-pulau Kecil (Technical Guidelines for Evaluating the Management Effectiveness of Aquatic, Coastal, and Small Island Conservation Areas)

7

© LA ODE SAHARI / WWF INDONESIA

Yellow-tail fusiliers (Caesio teres) making their way across an Acropora spp. dominated reef on Koon Island, Central Moluccas.

between MPA spacing (see dashboard), while IBAS MPAs have the greatest distances between them. In all MPAs, destructive fishing practices, such as blast fishing and the use of potassium cyanide, are the most common threats to marine resources identified by local communities, followed by trash and waste disposal. The number of perceived threats in an MPA is relative to local perception and awareness; however, perceived threats were higher in the LSS than IBAS (see dashboard). Management capacity and resources play a critical role in the effectiveness of MPA management in achieving conservation goals (Gill et al. 2017). Management capacity was generally higher in the LSS than SESS, with intermediate levels in IBAS. However, capacity was highly variable, ranging from as low as 9% to 90%. This variation is likely in part influenced by the age of the MPAs, with newly established MPAs still building management capacity. Many MPAs in SESS also did not have clearly defined boundaries, reflective of the recent initiation/establishment dates of these MPAs.

Both ecological resilience and food security are enhanced by high connectivity between MPAs

ENABLING CONDITIONS

© AMKIELTIELA/ WWF INDONESIA

Oceanic manta (Manta birostris) in the waters of Moa Island, Southwest Moluccas.

Enabling conditions are favorable conditions that must be in place for effective MPAs, including those at the national and local level, and spanning legal, ecological, institutional, financial, and political aspects (Conservation and Community Investment Forum, 2013). Within the SBS, 47% (479,580 ha) of coral reefs, 40% (30,535 ha) of seagrass, and 29% (56,007 ha) of mangrove habitat have been protected within MPAs. While all three critical habitats meet the Indonesian government target of a minimum of 20% protection for critical habitats, we recommend that mangrove protection be increased. Within the MPAs, the proportion of these critical habitats that are within nonextractive zones is highly variable, ranging from 8.3% to 68.2% with a mean of 29.1%. Overall, LSS MPAs have the greatest proportion of areas in non-extractive use, and IBAS the least (see dashboard). Local communities identify destructive fishing practices as the most common threat to marine resources.

8

Connectivity between MPAs is important to ensure that critical habitats have high ecological resilience through fish migration and larval connectivity (Krueck et al.2017) and also for supporting food security (D’Agostini et al. 2015). Overall, 23 SBS MPAs have more than six other MPAs within 100 km, 32 have three to six MPAs within 100 km, and 21 have only two MPAs within 100 km. The SESS has the least distance

9

© IMANIAR PRATIWI/ WWF INDONESIA

Unsold catches, such as octopuses, are often salted and dried for long term storage. Women play an active role in preserving protein sources in places where refrigeration is rare or absent.

Communities within IBAS have higher rates of school enrollment than LSS, with the SBS mean of 84% of people 5-18 years old enrolled in school. These differences may reflect differences between Indonesian provinces, rather than MPA effects, as school enrollment rates in Maluku (IBAS) are generally higher than those in Nusa Tenggara Timur Province (LSS). Place attachment index measures the emotional connection between individuals and their environment (Williams and Vaske, 2003); MPA establishment potentially either created or altered attachment effects. While place attachment effects were greater in IBAS than LSS, they were highly variable between individual MPAs. LSS contained the MPAs with both the highest place attachment index (Flores Timur) and the lowest (Selat Pantar), while the second highest was in Koon (IBAS).

Community, social and cultural characteristics affect the level of collective control over marine resources.

HUMAN WELL-BEING The livelihoods and well-being of millions of local people living in coastal areas in the SBS region heavily depend on their surrounding marine environment. Surveys in local communities in LSS and IBAS indicate that overall human well-being is similar between these two subseascapes.

© IGNATIA DYAHAPSARI / WWF INDONESIA

Children playing at a port in Labengki Kecil Island, Teluk Lasolo MPA.

MPA management may affect household income, therefore changing consumption and purchasing patterns of local communities, especially of material assets. The household material asset index varied from 18.5 to 32.1 across the SBS region (mean: 26.1), with Kei Kecil (IBAS) scoring highest. Within each subseacape, health—as measured by food security—highly varied between individual MPAs. Flores Timur had the greatest food security, pulling up the performance of LSS, though other MPAs within LSS and IBAS were similar for food security. MPAs may affect human well-being in many ways including: income, health, political empowerment and education.

10

LSS communities had a higher level of political empowerment—as measured on the marine tenure index—than IBAS MPAs. This is likely related to the social and cultural characteristics of Maluku Province within IBAS, where the rules associated with marine resource use are often made by the village leaders, or king, rather than collectively by community members.

11

MULTI-USE MPAs AND FISH CONNECTIVITY: IMPROVING ECOLOGICAL RESILIENCE AND FISHERIES BENEFITS IN AN MPA NETWORK

Mar ine

M

Pr o

an g

r o v e H a bi

ta t

B

ry

t ec

ted

a Are

da oun

As fish mature, juveniles will migrate from nursery habitats into adult habitats.

grass Habita

t

Se a

Around 10-100 km of distance between MPAs will aid optimal movements between fish populations

Spillover effect: adults may repopulate depleted areas outside MPAs as well, thus benefiting local fisheries

20-30%

Well-placed, healthy and effectively managed No-Take Zones (dark blue section) will help replenish Take Zones (green section)

Coral

a Reef Habit

t

of each critical habitat type in an MPA should be protected as No-Take Zones (NTZ)

CONNECTIVITY Inclusion of critical nursery and adult habitats within an MPA ensures ecological connectivity - allowing fish to complete their life cycles.

Sufficient connectivity between MPAs will support the protection of dispersing larvae and migrating adult fish, enhancing resiliency of the whole network

ECOSYSTEM HEALTH The health of an ecosystem is critical for maintaining ecological function and the ecosystem services that people depend on (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010). We consider the status and coverage of three critical coastal area habitats: mangrove forests, seagrass beds, and coral reefs. Overall, mean healthy hard coral cover in SBS was 36%, with both the highest coral cover (Gili Balu - 53%) and the lowest (Gili Matra - 9.8%) recorded in LSS. Of the five MPAs with repeat hard coral cover monitoring, there were no significant changes in hard coral cover, and variable trend directions between the individual MPAs. Mangrove forests in SBS require protection as significant declines have occured.

Mangrove forest in the SBS region covers a total area of approximately 191,827 ha, representing 5% of total mangrove cover in Indonesia. While a small proportion of Indonesian mangrove area, the SBS represents 1.5% of global mangroves, as Indonesia holds 28% of the global mangrove estate. 29.2% of the mangrove forests in SBS are protected within MPAs. Despite this, mangroves were lost from within MPAs in two of the subseascapes, with the percentage change in mangrove extent within MPAs between 2014 and 2016: 18.1% in LSS, 0.3% in IBAS, and 0.2% in SESS. Overall mangrove cover within most provinces within SBS also unfortunately declined significantly between 2014 and 2016. Mangrove protection in SESS is low (