Victorian Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program - Parks Victoria

parks victoria technical series 

Number 62 

Victorian Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program: 

The reef biota at Marine Protected Areas 

within the Twofold Shelf 

Volume 3 

M. Edmunds, K. Stewart, K. Pritchard and R. Zavalas 

June 2010

© Parks Victoria 

All rights reserved. This document is subject to the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this 

publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, or by 

any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise without the prior permission of 

the publisher. 

First published 2010 

Published by Parks Victoria 

Level 10, 535 Bourke Street, Melbourne Victoria 3000 

Opinions expressed by the Authors of this publication are not necessarily those of Parks 

Victoria, unless expressly stated. Parks Victoria and all persons involved in the preparation and 

distribution of this publication do not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the 

opinions or information contained in the publication. 

Author(s): 

Matt Edmunds – Marine ecologist, Australian Marine Ecology Pty Ltd 

Kim Stewart – Marine ecologist, Australian Marine Ecology Pty Ltd 

Katharine Pritchard – Marine ecologist, Australian Marine Ecology Pty Ltd 

Richard Zavalas – Marine ecologist, Australian Marine Ecology Pty Ltd 

National Library of Australia 

Cataloguing-in-publication data 

Includes bibliography 

ISSN 1448-4935 

Citation 

Edmunds, M., Stewart, K., Pritchard, K., and Zavalas, R. (2010) Victorian Subtidal Reef 

Monitoring Program: The reef biota at Marine Protected Areas within the Twofold Shelf. 

Volume 3. Parks Victoria Technical Series No. 62. Parks Victoria, Melbourne. 

Printed on environmentally friendly paper

Parks Victoria Technical Paper Series No. 62 

Victorian Subtidal Reef Monitoring 

Program: 

The reef biota at Marine Protected Areas 

within the Twofold Shelf 

Volume 3 

Matt Edmunds 

Kim Stewart 

Katharine Pritchard 

Richard Zavalas 

Australian Marine Ecology Pty Ltd 

June 2010

Parks Victoria Technical Series No. 62 

Twofold Shelf Subtidal Reef Monitoring 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Shallow reef habitats cover extensive areas along the Victorian coast and are dominated by 

seaweeds, mobile invertebrates and fishes. These reefs are known for their high biological 

complexity, species diversity and productivity. They also have significant economic value 

through commercial and recreational fishing, diving and other tourism activities. To effectively 

manage and conserve these important and biologically rich habitats, the Victorian 

Government has established a long-term Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program (SRMP). Over 

time the SRMP will provide information on the status of Victorian reef flora and fauna and 

determine the nature and magnitude of trends in species populations and species diversity 

through time. 

The subtidal reef monitoring program is established throughout Victoria for all relevant 

marine protected areas (MPA). This report describes the 2009 survey of the Twofold Shelf 

Bioregion sites associated with the Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary, Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

The subtidal reef monitoring program uses standardised underwater visual census methods 

to survey algae, macroinvertebrates and fish. This report aims to: 

Provide general descriptions of the biological communities and species populations at 

each monitoring site in March-May 2009. 

Identify any unusual biological phenomena such as interesting communities and species. 

Ecologically significant temporal changes in comparison with reference areas. 

Identify any introduced species at the monitoring locations. 

The surveys were along a 200 m transect line. Each transect was surveyed for: 

Abundance and size structure of large fishes 

Abundance of cryptic fishes and benthic invertebrates 

Percentage cover of macroalgae 

Density of string kelp species 

There have been four surveys in the Twofold Shelf Bioregion marine sanctuaries over the 

past nine years: February 2001; March 2004; February 2006; and March-May 2009. The key 

observations during this time for the Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary, Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and Cape Howe Marine National Park are provided below. 

Key Observations for Relevant Marine Protected Areas 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary (MS) is a unique pinnacle environment and includes features 

such as a seal haulout, stands of bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum and aggregations of butterfly 

perch Caesioperca lepidoptera. Key observations made at Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

during the monitoring program are: 

The sites in the Beware Reef monitoring region had seaweed, invertebrate and fish 

communities that were distinctly different to the other monitoring regions. Assemblage 

differences between the Beware Reef and Pearl Point monitoring sites were maintained 

over the monitoring period. 

Algal species richness had an increasing trend at both sites. 

Invertebrate diversity decreased at Beware Reef MS between 2004, 2006 and 2009. 

The abundance of bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum increased by 16% between 2006 and 

2009. 

II



The abundances of feather star Comanthus trichoptera increased markedly at both 

Beware Reef MS and Pearl Point between 2006 and 2009. 

The long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii decreased slightly in abundance 

on the transects at Beware Reef MS, however qualitative observations in deeper waters 

along the northern wall indicates densities in less exposed waters may have increased. 

The abundance of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola increased considerably at both 

Beware Reef MS and Pearl Point between 2006 and 2009. 

Point Hicks Marine National Park 

For Point Hicks Marine National Park (MNP), the four MPA sites and two of the reference 

sites are situated on the granite slopes, boulders and outcrops around the Point Hicks 

headland. Two other reference sites are located several kilometres to the east on moderate 

relief reefs at Müller’s Reef and Petrel Point. Key observations made at Point Hicks Marine 

National Park during the monitoring program are: 

The kelp stands in the Point Hicks region were generally a mixture of crazyweed, 

Phyllospora comosa, and common kelp, Ecklonia radiata, with the proportions of these to 

species varying according to the habitat and location. 

There were generally two invertebrate assemblage types, with a Point Hicks type 

(associated with higher Phyllospora abundances) and a Müller Reef/Petrel Point type 

(associated with higher Ecklonia abundances) – the latter group is dominated by filter 

feeders, including Comanthus trichoptera. 

The fish assemblages in the Point Hicks region were distinct from Beware Reef and Cape 

Howe, however there was no clear distinction between sites. 

Each monitoring site had a characteristic seaweed and invertebrate assemblage structure 

with site distinctiveness maintained between surveys. 

There were considerable changes at Old Jetty Bay within the Point Hicks MNP: 

o decreasing trend in algal species diversity from 2004 to 2009 with greatly 

reduced abundances of smaller thallose red algae and other significant 

compositional changes, 

o absence of string kelp, Macrocystis angustifolia, from 2006 to 2009. 

Increased canopy coverage of Phyllospora comosa at the reference site Krafts Garden 

with corresponding declines in smaller thallose red algal abundances. 

Persistent abundance of bull kelp, Durvillaea potatorum, at the reference site Durvillaea 

Flats. 

Very high densities of feather star, Comanthus trichoptera, at the reference sites Müllers 

Reef and Petrel Point (as with Pearl Point). 

Increased abundance of blacklip abalone, Haliotis rubra, within the MNP sites of Hicks 

Joggle and Hicks Lighthouse and at the reference sites Krafts Garden and Durvillaea 

Flats (all adjacent sites). 

Densities of blue throated wrasse, Notolabrus tetricus, and purple wrasse, N. fucicola, 

declined between 2004 and 2006 within the MNP at Hicks Southwest and Hicks Joggle 

and at the reference sites Durvillaea Flats, Müllers Reef and Petrel Reef. 

There were large temporal variations in density of herring cale, Odax cyanomelas, at 

most sites, with a substantial decline between 2006 and 2009 and a reduction in 

observed sizes. 

Densities of banded morwong, Cheilodactylus spectabilis, were generally more abundant 

within Point Hicks MNP, however densities in 2009 were generally lower than observed 

previously. 

Densities of sea sweep, Scorpis aequipinnis, were generally low, with nearly all 

individuals observed being within the Point Hicks MNP. 

III



Cape Howe Marine National Park 

Cape Howe MNP is located adjacent to the NSW border. The four MPA sites are situated on 

low to moderate relief reef in the northern corner of the MNP. Two reference sites are located 

at Iron Prince Reef, in a 3 km 2 excision from the park. Other reference sites are located on 

granite reefs at Gabo Island. Key observations made at Cape Howe Marine National Park 

during the monitoring program are: 

The kelp stands in the Cape Howe region were large monospecific stands of crayweed 

Phyllospora comosa. The canopy cover of these stands are among the highest recorded 

for Victoria. There is considerable shading beneath the canopy of these stands, which 

often have a high cover of sessile invertebrates on the reef substratum, particularly at 

Howe West. 

There were large areas of sea urchin barrens in the Cape Howe region which were 

depauperate of seaweeds except for crustose coralline algae. These areas are 

predominantly on Gabo and Tullaberga Islands and support unique fish assemblages. 

Monitoring of the urchin barren areas was removed in 2009 and replaced with sites with 

seaweed cover to satisfy changed statistical requirements of the program. 

The fish fauna of the Cape Howe region was distinct from the Beware Reef and Point 

Hicks regions but there was little distinction between sites within the region. Two 

exceptions were Gabo Harbour and Gabo Monument, which had distinctly different 

assemblages which were maintained over the monitoring period. 

There was a marked increase in algal species richness at the two Iron Prince reference 

sites from 2004 to 2009. 

There was a marked increase in invertebrate diversity at Iron Prince West between 2006 

and 2009. 

Fish species richness and diversity within the Cape Howe MNP increased to its highest 

recorded level during 2009. Fish species richness and diversity was persistently high at 

the Iron Prince reference sites over the monitoring period. 

There were persistently high covers of crazyweed, Phyllospora comosa, at the two Iron 

Prince reference sites and at the adjacent two Cape Howe MNP sites, Howe West and 

Howe Central. 

There were considerable changes at the Howe Border site: 

o a marked decline in P. comosa cover, reducing from 70% cover in 2001 to 

29% cover in 2009, 

o decreases in blacklip abalone, Haliotis rubra, density and, 

o increased density of long-spined urchin, Centrostephanus rodgersii. 

There was a slight increase in the abundance of smaller erect seaweed species within 

Cape Howe MNP, including Halopteris spp., Haliptilon roseum, Amphiroa anceps, 

Carpomitra costata and Delisea pulchra. 

Blacklip abalone, H. rubra, abundances increased at the Howe Central site from 2006 to 

2009. 

The abundances of blue throated wrasse, Notolabrus tetricus, fluctuated between 2001 

and 2006 with notable increases in abundance in the Cape Howe MNP to 2009. 

There was an increasing trend in abundance of purple wrasse, N. fucicola, in the Cape 

Howe MNP from 2004 to 2006 to 2009. 

The sizes of herring cale, Odax cyanomelas, were considerably smaller in 2009 than 

2004. 

There was an increasing trend in abundance of banded morwong, Cheilodactylus 

spectabilis, within the Cape Howe MNP since 2001. There was no obvious increase in 

IV



density of larger individuals, however there were substantially more juvenile fish observed 

in 2009. 

The abundance of all fishes in the 12 to 20 cm size classes was considerably higher at 

Howe West, Howe Central and Iron Prince Wreck in 2009 compared with 2004. 

The densities of eastern blue groper, Achoerodus viridis, were generally low during the 

monitoring program. A much higher density was observed at Howe Central in 2009. Most 

of these fishes were small (< 300 mm). 

V



CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................II 

Key Observations for Relevant Marine Protected Areas.........................................................II 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary ............................................................................................................II 

Point Hicks Marine National Park.........................................................................................................III 

Cape Howe Marine National Park....................................................................................................... IV 

CONTENTS............................................................................................................... VI 

INDEX OF FIGURES AND TABLES....................................................................... VIII 

1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1 

1.1 Subtidal Reef Ecosystems of the Twofold Bioregion.........................................................1 

1.2 Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program...................................................................................6 

1.2.1 Objectives....................................................................................................................................6 

1.2.2 Monitoring Protocols and Locations ............................................................................................7 

1.2.3 Monitoring in the Twofold Shelf Bioregion...................................................................................7 

2 METHODS...............................................................................................................8 

2.1 Site Selection and Survey Times.....................................................................................8 

2.2 Census Method .............................................................................................................10 

2.2.1 Transect Layout.........................................................................................................................10 

2.2.2 Method 1 – Mobile Fishes and Cephalopods............................................................................11 

2.2.3 Method 2 – Invertebrates and Cryptic Fishes ...........................................................................11 

2.2.4 Method 3 – Macroalgae and Sessile Invertebrates...................................................................11 

2.2.5 Method 4 – Macrocystis ............................................................................................................11 

2.3 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................16 

2.3.1 Community Structure.................................................................................................................16 

2.3.2 Depiction of Community Differences.........................................................................................16 

2.3.3 Trends in Community Structure ..................................................................................16 

2.3.4 Species Diversity........................................................................................................16 

2.3.5 Species Populations ...................................................................................................17 

3 REGIONAL COMMUNITY ANALYSIS..................................................................18 

3.1 Biogeography ................................................................................................................18 

3.2 Macroalgae....................................................................................................................18 

3.3 Invertebrates .................................................................................................................24 

3.4 Fish ...............................................................................................................................30 

4 BEWARE REEF MARINE SANCTUARY..............................................................36 

4.1 Site Descriptions ............................................................................................................36 

4.2 Macroalgae....................................................................................................................36 


4.4 Fishes............................................................................................................................42 

5 POINT HICKS MARINE NATIONAL PARK..........................................................47 


5.2 Macroalgae....................................................................................................................48 


VI



5.4 Fish ................................................................................................................................58 

6 CAPE HOWE MARINE NATIONAL PARK...........................................................65 


6.2 Macroalgae....................................................................................................................66 


6.4 Fish ...............................................................................................................................73 

7 REEF CONDITION INDICATORS.........................................................................82 

7.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................82 

7.2 Indicator Calculation Methods .......................................................................................82 

7.2.1 Biodiversity (B) ..........................................................................................................................82 

7.2.2 Ecosystem Function and Processes (EF) .................................................................................83 

7.2.3 Climate Change (C)...................................................................................................................83 

7.2.4 Fishing (F) .................................................................................................................................84 

7.2.5 Environment (E) ........................................................................................................................85 

7.3 Indicator Results............................................................................................................86 

7.3.1 Indicator Plots and Legends......................................................................................................86 

7.3.2 Biodiversity (B) ..........................................................................................................................86 

7.3.3 Ecosystem Function and Processes (EF) .................................................................................91 

7.3.5 Fishing (F) .................................................................................................................................95 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..........................................................................................104 

REFERENCES........................................................................................................105 

APPENDIX 1 ......................................................................................................... A1.1 

A1. Site Details................................................................................................................. A1.1 

A1.1 Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary.............................................................................................. A1.1 

A1.2 Point Hicks Marine National Park ........................................................................................... A1.3 

A1.3 Cape Howe Marine National Park......................................................................................... A1.11 

APPENDIX 2 ......................................................................................................... A2.1 

A2. Site Data.................................................................................................................... A2.1 

A2.1 Regional Community Analysis ................................................................................................ A2.1 

A2.2 Point Hicks Marine National Park ........................................................................................... A2.7 

A2.3 Cape Howe Marine National Park......................................................................................... A2.17 

VII



INDEX OF FIGURES AND TABLES 

FIGURES 

Figure 1.1. Examples of macroalgae, sessile invertebrates and substratum types 

present on subtidal reefs in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. ......................................... 2 

Figure 1.2. Examples of invertebrate species present on subtidal reefs in the Twofold 

Shelf bioregion......................................................................................................... 4 

Figure 1.3. Examples of fish species present on subtidal reefs in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion.................................................................................................................. 5 

Figure 2.1. Location of sites for the Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program in the Twofold 

Shelf bioregion. Coordinate system is Map Grid of Australia 1996 (MGA). .............10 

Figure 2.2. Biologist diver with transect reel. ........................................................................15 

Figure 2.3. The cover of macrophytes is measured by the number of points intersecting 

each species on the quadrat grid............................................................................15 

Figure 3.1. MDS plot of algal assemblage structure in the Twofold Shelf bioregion in 

March 2004. Kruskal stress = 0.15..........................................................................19 

Figure 3.2. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at Beware Reef MS and 

reference sites (data from Figure 3.1).....................................................................19 

Figure 3.3. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at Point Hicks MNP and 

reference sites (data from Figure 3.1).....................................................................20 

Figure 3.4. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at sites in the Cape Howe 

MNP and reference sites (data from Figure 3.1). ....................................................20 

Figure 3.5. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and reference sites.....................................................................21 

Figure 3.6. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Point Hicks 

Marine National Park and reference sites. ..............................................................21 

Figure 3.7. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Cape Howe 


Figure 3.8. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and reference sites. ...............................................................................22 

Figure 3.9. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park and reference sites.........................................................................................23 

Figure 3.10. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine 

National Park and reference sites...........................................................................23 

Figure 3.11. MDS plot of invertebrate assemblage structure in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion in March 2004. Kruskal stress = 0.10. .....................................................25 

Figure 3.12. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Beware Reef 

MS and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11)......................................................25 

Figure 3.13. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Point Hicks 

MNP and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11). ..................................................26 

Figure 3.14. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Cape Howe 

MNP and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11). ..................................................26 

Figure 3.15. Invertebrate species richness index for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

and reference sites. ................................................................................................27 

Figure 3.16. Invertebrate species richness index for Point Hicks Marine National Park 


Figure 3.17. Invertebrate species richness index for Cape Howe Marine National Park 


VIII



Figure 3.18. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and reference site. .................................................................................28 

Figure 3.19. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine 


Figure 3.20. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine 


Figure 3.22. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Beware Reef MS and 

reference sites (data from Figure 3.21)...................................................................31 

Figure 3.23. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Point Hicks MNP and 

references (data from Figure 3.21). ........................................................................32 

Figure 3.24. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Cape Howe MNP and 

reference sites (data from Figure 3.21)...................................................................32 

Figure 3.25. Fish species richness index for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and 

reference sites........................................................................................................33 

Figure 3.26. Fish species richness index for Point Hicks Marine National Park and 


Figure 3.27. Fish species richness index for Cape Howe Marine National Park and 


Figure 3.28. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 


Figure 3.29. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine National Park 


Figure 3.30. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine National 


Figure 4.1. Location of monitoring sites associated with Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary. The sanctuary is shaded blue. Coordinate system is Map Grid of 

Australia 1996 (MGA). ............................................................................................36 

Figure 4.2. Abundances (percent cover) of kelp Ecklonia radiata in Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. .........................................37 

Figure 4.3. Abundances (percent cover) of Phyllospora comosa in Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site......................................................38 

Figure 4.4. Abundances (percent cover) of crustose coralline algae in Beware Reef 


Figure 4.5. Abundances (percent cover) of Durvillaea potatorum in Beware Reef 


Figure 4.6. Densities (per 200 m²) of feather star Comanthus trichoptera in Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site..................................40 

Figure 4.7. Densities (per 200 m²) of long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii 

in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. ................40 

Figure 4.8. Densities (per 200 m²) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra in Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. ........................................41 

Figure 4.9. Densities (per 200 m²) of common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma in 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site....................41 

Figure 4.10. Mean sizes (mm ± 25 standard error) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra at 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site.....................42 

Figure 4.11. Aggregation of butterfly perch Caesioperca lepidoptera....................................43 

Figure 4.12. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus 

tetricus in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site...........43 

IX



Figure 4.13. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse, Notolabrus fucicola, in 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site...........................44 

Figure 4.14. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas in 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site...........................44 

Figure 4.15. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus 

spectabilis in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site......45 

Figure 4.16. Purple wrasse, Notolabrus fucicola, size-densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) 

in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site...........................45 

Figure 4.17. Blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus size-densities (number per 2000 

m 2 ) in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site.....................46 

Figure 4.18. Size-densities of all observed reef fishes (number per 2000 m 2 ) in Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site............................................46 

Figure 5.1. Location of monitoring sites associated with Point Hicks Marine National 

Park. The park area is shaded blue. Coordinate system is Map Grid of 

Australia 1996 (MGA). ............................................................................................48 

Figure 5.2. Site abundances (percent cover) of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Point 

Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites......................................................49 

Figure 5.3. Site abundances (percent cover) of common kelp Ecklonia radiata at Point 


Figure 5.4. Site abundances (percent cover) of brown strapweed Cystophora 

moniliformis at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites.....................50 

Figure 5.5. Site abundances (percent cover) of red understorey alga Rhodymenia 

linearis at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites.............................51 

Figure 5.6. Site abundances (percent cover) of crustose coralline algae at Point Hicks 


Figure 5.7. Abundances (percent cover) of seaweeds of interest at selected Point Hicks 

Marine National Park and reference sites: string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia; 

wiry brown weed Acrocarpia paniculata; and bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum. 

Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; and (3216) Durvillaea Flats.........................................52 

Figure 5.8. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the feather star Comanthus trichoptera at 

Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites.............................................53 

Figure 5.9. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the seastar Meridiastra calcar at Point 


Figure 5.10. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri at 


Figure 5.11. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Point 


Figure 5.12. Mean sizes (mm ± standard error) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at 


Figure 5.13. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the common sea urchin Heliocidaris 

erythrogramma at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites................56 

Figure 5.14. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the red bait crab Plagusia chabrus at 


Figure 5.15. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the long spined sea urchin 

Centrostephanus rodgersii at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference 

sites........................................................................................................................57 

Figure 5.16. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the turban shell Turbo undulatus at Point 


X



Figure 5.17. Banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Sensation Reef, Point 

Hicks Marine National Park.....................................................................................59 

Figure 5.18. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse 

Notolabrus tetricus at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. .........59 

Figure 5.19. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus 

tetricus at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. ...........................60 

Figure 5.20. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus 

fucicola at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites............................60 

Figure 5.21. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at 


Figure 5.22. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas 

at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites.........................................61 

Figure 5.23. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at 


Figure 5.24. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference 

sites........................................................................................................................62 

Figure 5.25. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus 

spectabilis at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. ......................63 

Figure 5.26. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of all observed reef fishes at Point 


Figure 5.27. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus 

lophodon at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. ........................64 

Figure 6.1. Location of monitoring sites at Cape Howe Marine National Park. Marine 

National Park is indicated in shaded grey. Coordinate system is Map Grid of 

Australia 1996 (MGA). ............................................................................................66 

Figure 6.2. Percent cover of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Cape Howe Marine 


Figure 6.3. Percent cover of crustose coralline algae at Cape Howe Marine National 


Figure 6.4. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine 


Figure 6.5. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine 


Figure 6.6. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of long spined sea urchin 

Centrostephanus rodgersii at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference 

sites........................................................................................................................70 

Figure 6.7. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of turban shell Turbo undulatus at 

Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites............................................70 

Figure 6.8. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra at 


Figure 6.9. Mean sizes (mm ± standard error) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Cape 

Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. ....................................................71 

Figure 6.10. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of common sea urchin Heliocidaris 

erythrogramma at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. ..............72 

Figure 6.11. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri 

at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites........................................72 

Figure 6.12. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse 

Notolabrus tetricus at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites..........74 

XI



Figure 6.13. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus 

tetricus at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites............................75 

Figure 6.14. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus 

fucicola at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites...........................75 

Figure 6.15. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at 


Figure 6.17. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas 

at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites........................................76 

Figure 6.18. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at 


Figure 6.19. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference 

sites........................................................................................................................77 

Figure 6.20. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus 

spectabilis at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites.......................78 

Figure 6.21. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of all fishes at Cape Howe Marine 


Figure 6.22. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus 

lophodon at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. .......................79 

Figure 6.23. Site conditions and example photographs of typical fauna observed at Site 

11, Gabo Island Harbour, 24 May 2009. .................................................................80 

Figure 6.24. Site conditions and example photographs of typical flora and fauna 

observed at Site 25, Gabo Island Northeast Gulch, 23 May 2009...........................81 

Figure 7.1. Key to time series plots for Figures 7.2 to 7.19. ..................................................88 

Figure 7.2. Biodiversity condition indicators – species richness (B2): (a) fishes, 

including cryptic fishes; (b) mobile invertebrates; and (c) seaweeds. ......................88 

Figure 7.3. Biodiversity condition indicators – species diversity (B2): (a) fishes, 

including cryptic fishes; (b) mobile invertebrates; and (c) seaweeds. ......................89 

Figure 7.4. Biodiversity condition indicators – total abundance of individuals (B2): (a) 

fishes, number per 2000 m 2 ; (b) mobile invertebrates, number per 200 m 2 ; and 

(c) seaweeds, sum of percentage covers................................................................90 

Figure 7.5. Ecosystem function condition indicators – total abundance of individuals 

(EF1): (a) canopy-forming brown seaweeds, sum of percentage covers; (b) 

smaller brown seaweeds, sum of percentage covers; and (c) thallose red 

seaweeds, sum of percentage covers.....................................................................91 

Figure 7.5 (continued). Ecosystem function condition indicators – total abundance of 

individuals (EF1): (d) green seaweeds, sum of percentage covers; and (e) 

erect coralline seaweeds, sum of percentage covers..............................................92 

Figure 7.6. Climate condition indicators – proportion of Peronian biogeographic 

province species (C1): (a) fishes, percent; (b) invertebrates, percent; and (c) 

and seaweeds, percent...........................................................................................93 

Figure 7.7. Climate condition indicators – proportion of Peronian biogeographic 

province individuals (C2): (a) fishes, percent; (b) invertebrates, percent; and 

(c) and seaweeds, percent......................................................................................94 

Figure 7.8. Climate condition indicators – abundance of selected species (C3): (a) 

string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia, percent cover; (b) bull kelp Durvillaea 

potatorum, percent cover; and (c) and long-spined sea urchin 

Centrostephanus rodgersii, number per 200 m 2 ......................................................95 

XII



Figure 7.9. Fishing condition indicators – blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra (F1-F3): (a) 

mean size, mm; (b) mean density of legal sized abalone, number per 200 m 2 ; 

and (c) mean abundance proportion of legal sized abalone....................................97 

Figure 7.10. Fishing condition indicators – packhorse lobster Jasus verreauxi (F4-F6): 

(a) mean size, mm; (b) mean density of legal sized lobster, number per 200 

m 2 ; and (c) mean abundance proportion of legal sized lobster................................98 

Figure 7.11. Fishing condition indicators – fish size spectra (F7-F8): (a) mean slope of 

spectra; and (b) mean half-height of spectra...........................................................99 

Figure 7.12. Fishing condition indicators – large fish biomass and abundance (F9-F10): 

(a) mean biomass of selected species, individuals ≥ 300 mm; and (b) mean 

proportion of selected fished species individuals of all fishes ≥ 300 mm. ................99 

Figure 7.13. Fishing condition indicators – banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis 

(F11): (a) mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and 

(b) mean size, mm................................................................................................100 

Figure 7.14. Fishing condition indicators – bastard trumpeter Latridopsis forsteri (F12): 

(a) mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and (b) 

mean size, mm. ....................................................................................................100 

Figure 7.15. Fishing condition indicators – blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus 


(b) mean size, mm................................................................................................101 

Figure 7.16. Fishing condition indicators – purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola (F14): (a) 

mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and (b) mean 

size, mm. ..............................................................................................................101 

Figure 7.17. Fishing condition indicators – crimson banded wrasse Notolabrus 

gymnogenis (F15): (a) mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 

2000 m 2 ; and (b) mean size, mm. .........................................................................102 

Figure 7.18. Fishing condition indicators – eastern blue groper Achoerodus viridis 


(b) mean size, mm................................................................................................102 

Figure 7.19. Environment condition indicators – dominance of selected components 

(E1-E3): (a) relative proportion of canopy browns (CB) and green and red 

seaweeds (GR); (b) relative proportion of canopy browns (CB) and crustose 

coralline algae (CCA); and (b) cover of sand. .......................................................103 

TABLES 

Table 2.1. Subtidal reef monitoring sites and survey times in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion.................................................................................................................. 9 

Table 2.2. Mobile fish (Method 1) surveyed in the Twofold bioregion....................................12 

Table 2.3. Invertebrates and cryptic fish (Method 2) surveyed on the in the Twofold 

Shelf bioregion........................................................................................................13 

Table 2.4. Macroalgae (Method 3) surveyed on the in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. .............14 

XIII



1 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Subtidal Reef Ecosystems of the Twofold Bioregion 

The Twofold Shelf bioregion extends from east of Wilsons Promontory to Tathra in southern 

New South Wales. The western portion of the Twofold Shelf bioregion is largely comprised of 

long sandy beaches (Ninety Mile Beach) with extensive areas of inshore and offshore sandy 

beds with some small offshore reefs. The sandy habitats of the far eastern coastline are 

punctuated by rocky headlands and localised outcrops of granite and metamorphic rocks, 

such as at Cape Conran, Point Hicks, Rame Head, Gabo Island and Iron Prince at Cape 

Howe. Sea temperatures are warmer in the Twofold Shelf region compared to elsewhere in 

Victoria because of incursions of the East Australia current bringing warmer water down the 

east coast of the continent. The continental slope is quite close to the far eastern Victorian 

shore and cold-water upwellings are frequent. These upwellings provide nutrients to the 

inshore ecosystems, contributing to high productivity. The biota of this region has a high 

component of eastern temperate species, in addition to many southern temperate and 

cosmopolitan species. 

A prominent biological component of all Victorian shallow reefs is kelps and other seaweeds 

(Figure 1.1). Large species of brown algae, such as the common kelp, Ecklonia radiate, and 

crazyweed, Phyllospora comosa, are usually present along the open coast in dense stands. 

The production rates of dense seaweed beds are equivalent to the most productive habitats 

in the world, including seagrass beds and terrestrial grasslands, with approximately 2 kg of 

plant material produced per square metre per year. These stands may have 10-30 kg of plant 

material per square metre. The biomass of seaweeds is greater where giant species such as 

string kelp, Macrocystis angustifolia, and bull kelp, Durvillaea potatorum, occur. 

Seaweeds provide important habitat structure for other organisms on the reef. This habitat 

structure varies considerably, depending on the type of seaweed species present. Tall 

vertical structures in the water column are formed by Macrocystis angustifolia, which 

sometimes forms a dense layer of fronds floating on the water surface. Other species with 

large, stalk-like stipes, such as Ecklonia radiata, Phyllospora comosa and Durvillaea 

potatorum, form a canopy 0.5-2 m above the rocky substratum. Lower layers of structure are 

formed by: foliose macroalgae typically 10-30 cm high, such as the green Caulerpa and red 

Plocamium species; turfs (to 10 cm high) of red algae species, such as Pterocladia 

capillacea; and hard encrusting layers of pink coralline algae. The nature and composition of 

these structural layers varies considerably within and between reefs, depending on the 

biogeographical region, depth, exposure to swell and waves, currents, temperature range, 

water clarity and presence of sand. 

1



a. Coralline algae Amphiroa anceps. b. Peacock-weed Lobophora variegata. 

c. Soft coral Capnella gaboensis. d. Mixed red and brown algae. 

e. Caulerpa trifaria. f. Urchin barren. 

Figure 1.1. Examples of macroalgae, sessile invertebrates and substratum types present on subtidal 

reefs in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

2



Grazing and predatory mobile invertebrates are prominent animal inhabitants of the reef 

(Figure 1.2). An important invertebrate of the eastern Twofold Shelf bioregion is the longspined 

sea urchin, Centrostephanus rodgersii. Centrostephanus forms large grazing 

aggregations which denude the reef of erect algal species, forming ‘sea urchin barrens’. 

Removal of large seaweeds by Centrostephanus causes substantial changes to subtidal reef 

community structure on reefs in eastern temperate Australia. 

Other common invertebrate grazers found at Twofold Shelf reefs include blacklip abalone 

Haliotis rubra, the eastern temperate gastropod, Astralium tentoriformis, warrener, Turbo 

undulates, and sea urchin, Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Predatory invertebrates include 

dogwhelks, Dicathais orbita, eastern rock lobster ,Jasus verreauxi, octopus, Octopus 

moarum and a wide variety of seastar species. Other large reef invertebrates include mobile 

filter feeding animals such as feather stars, Comanthus trichoptera and sessile (attached) 

species such as sponges, corals, bryozoans, hydroids and ascidians. 

Fish are also a dominant component of reef ecosystems, in terms of both biomass and 

ecological function (Figure 1.3). Reef fish assemblages include roaming predators such as 

blue-throated wrasse, Notolabrus tetricus, herbivores such as herring cale, Odax 

cyanomelas, planktivores such as sea sweep, Scorpis aequipinnis, and picker-feeders such 

as six-spined leatherjacket, Meuschenia freycineti. The type and abundance of each fish 

species varies considerably, depending on exposure to swell and waves, depth, currents, 

reef structure, seaweed habitat structure and many other ecological variables. Many fish 

species play a substantial ecological role in the functioning and shaping of the ecosystem. 

For example, breeding aggregations of herring cale, Odax cyanomelas, at certain times of 

the year can increase patchiness in algal assemblages by concentrating herbivory on kelps 

in small areas for short periods of time. 

Although shallow reef ecosystems in Victoria are dominated by seaweeds, mobile 

invertebrates and fishes, in terms of biomass and production, there are many other important 

biological components to the reef ecosystem. These include small species of crustaceans 

and molluscs from 0.1 to 10 mm in size, occupying various niches as grazers, predators or 

foragers. At the microscopic level, films of microalgae and bacteria on the reef surface are 

also very important. 

3



a. Sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. b. Sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii. 

c. Nudibranch Hypselodoris bennetti. d. Pencil urchin Phyllacanthus parvispinus. 

e. Black-lipped abalone Haliotis rubra. f. Feather star Comanthus trichoptera. 

Figure 1.2. Examples of invertebrate species present on subtidal reefs in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

4



a. Six-spined Leatherjacket b. White-ear Parma microlepis. 

Meuschenia freycineti. 

c. Maori wrasse Ophthalmolepis lineolatus, d. Purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola (left), 

Blue-throat wrasse Notolabrus tetricus (rear). banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis 

(right). 

e. Eastern hulafish Trachinops taeniatus. f. Trevally Pseudocaranx georgianus. 

Figure 1.3. Examples of fish species present on subtidal reefs in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

5



Victoria’s shallow reefs are a very important component of the marine environment because 

of their high biological complexity, species diversity and productivity. Subtidal reef habitats 

also have important social and cultural values, which incorporate aesthetic, recreational, 

commercial and historical aspects. Shallow subtidal reefs also have significant economic 

value, through commercial fishing of reef species such as wrasses, morwong, rock lobster, 

abalone and sea urchins, as well as recreational fishing, diving and other tourism activities. 

1.2 Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program 

1.2.1 Objectives 

An important aspect of the management and conservation of Victorian marine natural 

resources and assets is assessing the condition of the ecosystem and how this changes over 

time. Combined with an understanding of ecosystem processes, this information can be used 

to manage any threats or pressures on the environment to ensure ecosystem sustainability. 

Consequently, the Victorian Government has established a long-term Subtidal Reef 

Monitoring Program (SRMP). The primary objective of the SRMP is to provide information on 

the status of Victorian reef flora and fauna (focussing on macroalgae, macroinvertebrates 

and fish). This includes monitoring the nature and magnitude of trends in species 

abundances, species diversity and community structure. This is achieved through regular 

surveys at locations throughout Victoria, encompassing both representative and unique 

habitats and communities. 

Information from the SRMP allows managers to better understand and interpret long-term 

changes in the population and community dynamics of Victoria’s reef flora and fauna. As a 

longer time series of data is collected, the SRMP will allow managers to: 

Compare changes in the status of species populations and biological communities 

between highly protected marine national parks and marine sanctuaries and other 

Victorian reef areas (e.g. Edgar and Barrett 1997, 1999). 

Determine associations between species and between species and environmental 

parameters (e.g. depth, exposure, reef topography) and assess how these associations 

vary through space and time (e.g. Edgar et al. 1997; Dayton et al. 1998; Edmunds et al. 

2000). 

Provide benchmarks for assessing the effectiveness of management actions, in 

accordance with international best practice for quality environmental management 

systems (Holling 1978; Meredith 1997). 

Determine the responses of species and communities to unforeseen and unpredictable 

events such as marine pest invasions, mass mortality events, oil spills, severe storm 

events and climate change (e.g. Ebeling et al. 1985; Edgar 1998; Roob et al. 2000; 

Sweatman et al. 2003). 

A monitoring survey gives an estimate of population abundance and community structure at 

a small window in time. Patterns seen in data from periodic surveys are unlikely to exactly 

match changes in the real populations over time or definitively predict the size and nature of 

future variation. Plots of changes over time are unlikely to match the changes in real 

populations because changes over shorter time periods and actual minima and maxima may 

not be adequately sampled (e.g. Figure 1.4). Furthermore, because the nature and 

magnitude of environmental variation is different over different time scales, variation over 

long periods may not be adequately predicted from shorter-term data. Sources of 

environmental variation can operate at the scale of months (e.g. seasonal variation, 

harvesting), years (e.g. el Niño), decades (e.g. pollution, extreme storm events) or even 

centuries (e.g. tsunamis, global warming). Other studies indicate this monitoring program will 

begin to adequately reflect average trends and patterns as the surveys continue over longer 

6



periods (multiple years to decades). Results of this monitoring need to be interpreted within 

the context of the monitoring frequency and duration. 

Parameter 

Time 

Figure 1.4 An example plot depicting change in an environmental, population or community variable 

over time (days, months or years) and potential patterns from isolated observations. 

1.2.2 Monitoring Protocols and Locations 

The SRMP uses standardised underwater visual census methods based on an approach 

developed and applied in Tasmania by Edgar and Barrett (1997). Details of standard 

operational procedures and quality control protocols for Victoria’s SRMP are described in 

Edmunds and Hart (2003). 

The SRMP was initiated in May 1998 with 15 sites established on subtidal reef habitats in the 

vicinity of Port Phillip Heads Marine National Park. In 1999 the SRMP was expanded to reefs 

in the vicinity of the Bunurong Marine National Park, Phillip Island, and Wilsons Promontory 

Marine National Park. 

In 2003 and 2004, the Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program was expanded to include Marine 

National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries throughout Victoria. 

1.2.3 Monitoring in the Twofold Shelf Bioregion 

This report describes the subtidal reef monitoring program and results from surveys of 

subtidal reefs in the Twofold Shelf bioregion, including at Point Hicks and Cape Howe Marine 

National Parks and Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary. The objectives of this report were to: 

1. Provide an overview of the methods used for the SRMP. 

2. Provide general descriptions of the biological communities and species populations at 

each monitoring site up to February 2009. 

3. Describe changes and trends that have occurred over the monitoring period. 

4. Identify any unusual biological phenomena such as interesting or unique communities 

or species. 

5. Identify any introduced species at the monitoring locations. 

7



2 METHODS 

2.1 Site Selection and Survey Times 

Subtidal reefs were quantitatively surveyed in the Cape Howe and Point Hicks regions in 

2001, before the current marine protected areas were gazetted (Edmunds et al. 2001). 

These sites were located on available subtidal reefs inside and outside the current marine 

protected area boundaries. Consequently, it was considered appropriate to incorporate these 

surveyed sites into the formal subtidal reef monitoring program that commenced in 2004 

(data courtesy of Australian Marine Ecology). 

In 2001, seven sites were surveyed at the Point Hicks region and eight sites in the Cape 

Howe region (Edmunds et al. 2001). Although the objectives of the earlier study were 

different to this one, the same survey method was used and many of these sites were 

appropriate for the Parks Victoria long-term monitoring program. Some of the sites were 

unsuitable for the SRMP because of their depth or representativeness. Nine of these sites 

were selected as part of the long-term subtidal reef monitoring program. 

Since the commencement of the SRMP, two sites at Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary, eight 

sites Point Hicks Marine National Park and at least eight sites at Cape Howe have been 

surveyed on three occasions: 

1. March 2004, 

2. February 2006, and 

3. March-May 2009 (Figure 2.1; Table 2.1). 

At Beware Reef, one site was located inside the marine sanctuary and one site outside the 

marine sanctuary. At Point Hicks, four sites inside and four sites outside the marine national 

park were surveyed (Figure 2.1). 

At Cape Howe, four sites inside and four sites outside the marine national park were 

surveyed in 2004 and 2006. In 2009, three of these sites were discontinued and three new 

sites were established. Under the direction of Parks Victoria, two reference sites dominated 

by sea urchin barrens were substituted for two sites with seaweeds. One site in the MNP was 

deemed too close to the others so this was replaced by a more distant, but deeper site. A 

non-SRMP site, Site 11 Gabo Harbour, was resurveyed opportunistically during the 2009 

survey, being previously surveyed in 2001 (Table 2.1). 

Descriptions of the monitoring sites are presented in the following sections of each marine 

protected area. 

8



Table 2.1. Subtidal reef monitoring sites and survey times in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

Site 

No. 

Site Name 

Beware Reef MS 

MPA/ 

Reference 

Depth 

(m) 

Survey 1 Survey 2 Survey 3 Survey 4 

3223 Beware Reef MPA 10 25-03-04 12-02-06 20-03-09 

3224 Pearl Point Reference 8 25-03-04 12-02-06 20-03-09 

Point Hicks MNP 

3204 Old Jetty Bay MPA 4 06-02-01 17-03-04 08-02-06 20-03-09 

3221 Hicks Southwest MPA 8 25-03-04 12-02-06 19-03-09 

3222 Hicks Joggle MPA 5 25-03-04 12-02-06 19-03-09 

3206 Hicks Lighthouse MPA 5 10-02-01 19-03-04 15-02-06 19-03-09 

3207 Krafts Garden Reference 5 10-02-01 17-03-04 15-02-06 22-03-09 

3216 Durvillaea Flats Reference 4 17-03-04 15-02-06 22-03-09 

3217 Müller Reef Reference 7 19-03-04 16-02-06 22-03-09 

3218 Petrel Point Reference 8 19-03-04 15-02-06 22-03-09 

Cape Howe MNP 

3220 

Howe 

1 MPA 10 21-03-04 14-02-06 

Perpendicular 

3227 Howe Outer 2 MPA 14 05-05-09 

3213 Howe West MPA 7 09-02-01 20-03-04 09-02-06 18-03-09 

3214 Howe Central MPA 8 09-02-01 20-03-04 09-02-06 18-03-09 

3215 Howe Border MPA 10 11-02-01 20-03-04 09-02-06 18-03-09 

3208 Tullaberga Deep 3 Reference 7 07-02-01 23-03-04 14-02-06 

3210 Gabo Monument 3 Reference 6 07-02-01 23-03-04 14-02-06 

3211 Gabo Harbour 4 Reference 5 07-02-01 24-03-09 

3225 Gabo NE Gulch 5 Reference 7 23-03-09 

3226 

Gabo Boulder 

5 Reference 9 24-03-09 

Bay 

3212 Iron Prince West Reference 5 09-02-01 21-03-04 16-02-06 23-03-09 

3219 Prince Wreck Reference 6 21-03-04 12-02-06 23-03-09 

Notes: (1) discontinued as deemed too close to other sites; (2) replacement MPA site offshore and 

deeper than other sites; (3) discontinued as sea urchin barrens deemed not representative enough for 

statistical analysis purposes; (4) not part of the SRMP but opportunistically resurveyed because of 

high conservation values; and (5) new reference sites with seaweed rather than urchin barren 

communities. 

9



Cape Howe 

MNP 

Beware 

Reef MS 


Figure 2.1. Location of sites for the Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

Coordinate system is Map Grid of Australia 1996 (MGA). 

2.2 Census Method 

2.2.1 Transect Layout 

The visual census methods of Edgar and Barrett (Edgar & Barrett 1997, 1999; Edgar et al. 

1997) are used for this monitoring program. These are non-destructive and provide 

quantitative data on a large number of species and the structure of the reef communities. 

The Edgar-Barrett method is also used in Tasmania, New South Wales, South Australia and 

Western Australia. The adoption of this method in Victoria provides a systematic and 

comparable approach to monitoring reefs in southern Australia. The surveys in Victoria are in 

accordance with a standard operational procedure to ensure long-term integrity and quality of 

the data (Edmunds and Hart 2003). 

At most monitoring locations in Victoria, surveying along the 5 m depth contour is considered 

optimal because diving times are not limited by decompression schedules and these reefs 

are of interest to natural resource managers. However, the actual depth that can be surveyed 

varies with reef extent, geomorphology and exposure. Monitoring sites in the Twofold Shelf 

Bioregion vary between 4 and 14 metres. Monitoring sites were established in deeper water 

in this area because many sites were exposed to large swells and turbulent conditions. 

Each site is located using a differential GPS and marked with a buoy or the boat anchor. A 

100 m numbered and weighted transect line is run along the appropriate depth contour either 

side of the central marker. The resulting 200 m of line is divided into four contiguous 50 m 

sections (T1 to T4). The orientation of transect is the same for each survey, with T1 generally 

toward the north or east (i.e. anticlockwise around the coast). 

For each transect, four different census methods were used to obtain adequate descriptive 

information on reef communities at different spatial scales. These involved the census of: (1) 

the abundance and size structure of large fishes; (2) the abundance of cryptic fishes and 

benthic invertebrates; (3) the percent cover of macroalgae and sessile invertebrates; and (4) 

the density of string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia plants (where present). Over 100 species 

were observed during the monitoring program in the Twofold Shelf bioregion (Tables 2.2 to 

10



2.4). The depth, horizontal visibility, sea state and cloud cover are recorded for each site. 

Horizontal visibility is gauged by the distance along the transect line to detect a 100 mm long 

fish. All field observations are recorded on underwater paper. 

2.2.2 Method 1 – Mobile Fishes and Cephalopods 

The densities of mobile large fishes and cephalopods are estimated by a diver swimming up 

one side of a 50 m section of the transect, and then back along the other. The diver records 

the number and estimated size-class of fish, within 5 m of each side of the line (Figure 2.2). 

The size-classes for fish are 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 375, 400, 500, 

625, 750, 875 and 1000+ mm. Each diver has size-marks on their underwater slate to enable 

calibration of their size estimates. A total of four 10 x 50 m sections of the 200m transect are 

censused for mobile fish at each site. The data for easily sexed species are recorded 

separately for males and female/juveniles. Such species include the blue-throated wrasse 

Notolabrus tetricus, herring cale Odax cyanomelas, barber perch Caesioperca rasor, rosy 

wrasse Pseudolabrus rubicundus and some leatherjackets. 

2.2.3 Method 2 – Invertebrates and Cryptic Fishes 

Cryptic fishes and megafaunal invertebrates (non-sessile: e.g. large molluscs, echinoderms, 

crustaceans) are counted along the transect lines used for the fish survey. A diver counts 

animals within 1 m of one side of the line (a total of four 1 x 50 m sections of the 200 m 

transect). A known arm span of the diver is used to standardise the 1 m distance. The 

maximum length of abalone is measured in situ using vernier callipers whenever possible. 

Selected specimens are photographed or collected for identification and preservation in a 

reference collection. 

2.2.4 Method 3 – Macroalgae and Sessile Invertebrates 

The area covered by macroalgal and sessile invertebrate species is quantified by placing a 

0.25 m 2 quadrat at 10 m intervals along the transect line and determining the percent cover 

of the all plant species (Figure 2.3). The quadrat is divided into a grid of 7 x 7 perpendicular 

wires, giving 50 points (including one corner). Cover is estimated by counting the number of 

times each species occurs directly under the 50 positions on the quadrat (1.25 m 2 for each of 

the 50 m sections of the transect line). Selected specimens are photographed or collected for 

identification and preservation in a reference collection. 

2.2.5 Method 4 – Macrocystis 

Where present, the density of Macrocystis angustifolia plants is estimated. While swimming 

along the 200 m transect line, a diver counts all observable plants within 5 m either side of 

the line, for each 10 m section of the transect (giving counts for 100 m 2 sections of the 

transect). 

11



Table 2.2. Mobile fish (Method 1) surveyed in the Twofold bioregion. 

Method 1 

Cephalopoda Mobile Bony Fishes Mobile Bony Fishes 

Octopus maorum Upeneichthys lineatus Dotalabrus aurantiacus 

Upeneichthys vlaminghii Eupetrichthys angustipes 

Sharks and Rays Pempheris multiradiata Notolabrus gymnogenis 

Heterodontus portusjacksoni Kyphosus sydneyanus Notolabrus tetricus 

Parascyllium ferrugineum Girella tricuspidata Notolabrus fucicola 

Cephaloscyllium laticeps Girella elevata Pseudolabrus rubicundus 

Orectolobus maculatus Girella zebra Pseudolabrus luculentus 

Dasyatis brevicaudata Scorpis aequipinnis Pictilabrus laticlavius 

Myliobatis australis Scorpis lineolata Odax acroptilus 

Urolophus cruciatus Atypichthys strigatus Odax cyanomelas 

Urolophus paucimaculatus Enoplosus armatus Neoodax balteatus 

Trygonoptera testacea Pentaceropsis recurvirostris Bovichtus angustifrons 

Parma victoriae 

Cristiceps australis 

Mobile Bony Fishes Parma microlepis Acanthaluteres vittiger 

Scorpaena papillosa Chromis hypsilepis Meuschenia australis 

Caesioperca lepidoptera Chironemus marmoratus Meuschenia flavolineata 

Caesioperca rasor Aplodactylus arctidens Meuschenia freycineti 

Hypoplectrodes maccullochi Aplodactylus lophodon Meuschenia hippocrepis 

Trachinops taeniatus Cheilodactylus fuscus Eubalichthys bucephalus 

Dinolestes lewini Cheilodactylus nigripes Eubalichthys mosaicus 

Pseudocaranx georgianus Cheilodactylus spectabilis Contusus brevicaudus 

Trachurus novaezelandiae Nemadactylus douglasii Tetractenos glaber 

Trachurus declivis Dactylophora nigricans Diodon nichthemerus 

Arripis georgianus 

Latridopsis forsteri 

Arripis spp. Sphyraena novaehollandiae Mammals 

Parequula melbournensis Achoerodus viridis Arctocephalus pusillus 

Pagrus auratus 

Ophthalmolepis lineolata 

12



Table 2.3. Invertebrates and cryptic fish (Method 2) surveyed on the in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion. 

Method 2 

Polychaete Worms Crustacea Cryptic Fishes 

Sabellastarte australiensis Jasus edwardsii Cephaloscyllium laticeps 

Jasus verreauxi 

Orectolobus maculatus 

Molluscs Paguristes frontalis Urolophus cruciatus 

Chitons Strigopagurus strigimanus Heterodontus portusjacksoni 

Haliotis rubra Nectocarcinus tuberculatus Lotella rhacina 

Scutus antipodes Plagusia chabrus Pseudophycis bachus 

Phasianotrochus eximius Pagurid spp. Pseudophycis barbata 

Phasianella australis 

Scorpaena papillosa 

Phasianella ventricosa Echinoderms Centropogon australis 

Turbo undulatus Comanthus trichoptera Helicolenus percoides 

Turbo jourdani Comanthus tasmaniae Hypoplectrodes maccullochi 

Astralium tentoriformis Tosia magnifica Pempheris multiradiata 

Charonia lampas rubicunda Tosia australis Pempheris compressa 

Cabestana spengleri Nectria ocellata Parma victoriae 

Cabestana tabulata Nectria multispina Parma microlepis 

Argobuccinium vexillum Meridiastra calcar Gymnothorax prasinus 

Ranella australasia Coscinasterias muricata Chromis hypsilepis 

Dicathais orbita Astrostole scabra Chironemus marmoratus 

Penion maxima Goniocidaris tubaria Eupetrichthys angustipes 

Cominella lineolata Phyllacanthus parvispinus Bovichtus angustifrons 

Tambja verconis Heliocidaris erythrogramma Trinorfolkia clarkei 

Neodoris chrysoderma Centrostephanus rodgersii Heteroclinus perspicillatus 

Hypselodoris bennetti Amblypneustes spp. Contusus brevicaudus 

Octopus berrima Holopneustes inflatus Diodon nichthemerus 

Octopus tetricus 

Holopneustes purpurascens 

Octopus spp. 

13



Table 2.4. Macroalgae (Method 3) surveyed on the in the Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

Method 3 

Chlorophyta (green algae) Phaeophyta (brown algae) Rhodophyta (red algae) 

Ulva spp. Phyllospora comosa Plocamium dilatatum 

Chaetomorpha sp. Cystophora moniliformis Plocamium leptophyllum 

Chaetomorpha coliformis Cystophora monilifera Plocamium costatum 

Codium duthieae Cystophora retorta Mychodea acanthymenia 

Codium galeatum Cystophora siliquosa Asparagopsis armata 

Caulerpa scalpelliformis Acrocarpia paniculata Delisea pulchra 

Caulerpa trifaria Sargassum spp. Gracilaria secundata 

Caulerpa hodgkinsoniae Sargassum verruculosum Curdiea angustata 

Sargassum vestitum 

Amphiroa anceps 

Phaeophyta (brown algae) Brown algal turf Corallines unidentified 

Halopteris spp. 

Arthrocardia wardii 

Cladostephus spongiosus Rhodophyta (red algae) Haliptilon roseum 

Dictyota dichotoma Galaxaura marginata Rhodymenia australis 

Dictyota diemensis Pterocladia lucida Rhodymenia leptophylla 

Dilophus spp. Gelidium australe Rhodymenia linearis 

Dilophus marginatus Gelidium spp. Rhodymenia obtusa 

Dictyopteris acrostichoides Pterocladia capillacea Rhodymenia stenoglossa 

Dictyopteris muelleri Pterocladiella capillacea Rhodymenia wilsoni 

Padina sp. Nizymenia australis Cordylecladia furcellata 

Homeostrichus sinclairii Peyssonelia novaehollandiae Champia viridis 

Zonaria angustata Halymenia plana Ballia callitricha 

Zonaria crenata Grateloupia filicina Ceramium spp. 

Zonaria spp. Polyopes constrictus Griffithsia sp. 

Zonaria turneriana 

Polyopes tasmanicus 

(S. tasmanica) 

Hemineura frondosa 

Distromium spp. Callophyllis lambertii Dictymenia harveyana 

Exallosorus olsenii Callophyllis rangiferina Dictymenia tridens 

Lobophora variegata Plocamium angustum Lenormandia marginata 

Carpomitra costata Plocamium mertensii Other thallose red alga 

Sporochnus sp. Plocamium patagiatum Red turfing algae 

Colpomenia peregrina Phacelocarpus complanatus Encrusting corallines 

Colpomenia sinuosa Phacelocarpus peperocarpos Filamentous red algae 

Ecklonia radiata Acrotylus australis Lophurella periclados 

Macrocystis angustifolia Plocamium cartilagineum Nemastoma feredayae 

Durvillaea potatorum 

14



Figure 2.2. Biologist diver with transect reel. 

Figure 2.3. The cover of macrophytes is measured by the number of points intersecting each species 

on the quadrat grid. 

15



2.3 Data Analysis 

2.3.1 Community Structure 

Community structure is a function of both the species present and the abundance of each 

species. The community structure between pairs of samples was compared using the Bray- 

Curtis dissimilarity coefficient. This index compares the abundance of each species between 

two samples to give a single value of the difference between the samples, expressed as a 

percentage (Faith et al. 1987; Clarke 1993). 

Prior to analysis, the data were log transformed to weight down the influence of highly 

abundant species in describing community structure, giving a more even weighting between 

abundant and rarer species (following abundance transformations by Sweatman et al. 2000). 

The Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index was calculated for all possible combinations of sites. This 

resulted in a matrix of pair-wise comparisons known as a dissimilarity matrix. The 

dissimilarity matrix is also termed a distance matrix as it effectively represents distances 

between samples in hyper-dimensional space. The dissimilarity matrix was used for all 

analyses of community structure in this study. 

2.3.2 Depiction of Community Differences 

The hyper-dimensional information in the dissimilarity matrix was simplified and depicted 

using non-metric multidimensional scaling (MDS; Clarke 1993). This ordination method finds 

the representation in fewer dimensions that best depicts the actual patterns in the hyperdimensional 

data (i.e. reduces the number of dimensions while depicting the salient 

relationships between the samples). The MDS results were then depicted graphically to show 

differences between the replicates at each location. The distance between points on the MDS 

plot is representative of the relative difference in community structure. 

Kruskall stress is an indicator statistic calculated during the ordination process and indicates 

the degree of disparity between the reduced dimensional data set and the original hyperdimensional 

data set. A guide to interpreting the Kruskal stress indicator is given by Clarke 

(1993): (< 0.1) a good ordination with no real risk of drawing false inferences; (< 0.2) can 

lead to a usable picture, although for values at the upper end of this range there is potential 

to mislead; and (> 0.2) likely to yield plots which can be dangerous to interpret. These 

guidelines are simplistic and increasing stress is correlated with increasing numbers of 

samples. Where high stress was encountered with a two-dimensional data set, threedimensional 

solutions were sought to ensure an adequate representation of the higherdimensional 

patterns. 

2.3.3 Trends in Community Structure 

Trends in community structure will be examined when additional surveys have been 

completed at each location. 

2.3.4 Species Diversity 

Species diversity involves the consideration of two components: species richness and 

evenness. Species richness is the number of species present in the community while 

evenness is the degree of similarity of abundances between species. Species diversity is a 

combination of species richness and the relative abundance of each species, and is often 

referred to as species heterogeneity. Measures of diversity give an indication of the likelihood 

that two individuals selected at random from a community are different species. 

Species richness (S) was enumerated by the total species count per site. This value was 

used for calculation of evenness and heterogeneity statistics. Species diversity (i.e. 

heterogeneity among species) was described using the reciprocal of Simpson’s index 

16



(1/D Simpson = Hill’s N 2 ). This value describes species diversity as a combination of species 

richness (i.e. the number of species) and species evenness (i.e. the equitability of the 

abundances of the species). The value varies between 1 and s (i.e. the total number of 

species in the sample) with higher values indicating higher diversity. In general, Hills N 2 

gives an indication of the number of dominant species within a community. Hills N 2 provides 

more weighting for common species, in contrast to indices such as the Shannon-Weiner 

Index (Krebs 1999), which weights the rarer species. The weighting of common species was 

considered more appropriate for this study because the sampling regime is designed to 

target the more common species. 

2.3.5 Species Populations 

The abundance of each species was summarised by calculating total counts of fish and 

invertebrates and total percentage cover of macroalgae, for each site. Changes, trends and 

patterns were represented by locally-weighted regression (LOWESS) lines on the plots. The 

population size structure for blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra was assessed by calculating 

median lengths and the interquartile range (25 and 75 percentiles). 

The size structure of the common larger fishes was examined using length-frequency 

histograms. the species examined were blue-throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus, purple 

wrasse Notolabrus fucicola, banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis and herring cale 

Odax cyanomelas. The size-frequency distributions (size spectra) was also plotted for all 

fishes combined. These plots compared the size distributions between the latest survey and 

the first survey of all sites (Survey 2). 

17



3 REGIONAL COMMUNITY ANALYSIS 

3.1 Biogeography 

Victoria’s marine environment has been classified into five bioregions. These bioregions 

reflect differences in physical processes such as ocean currents and geology, which in turn 

influence the distribution of ecosystems and diversity over scales of 100-1000 km. Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary, Point Hicks Marine National Park and Cape Howe Marine National 

Park are within the Twofold Shelf bioregion. This bioregion is in eastern Victoria and extends 

from Wilsons Promontory to Tathra in southern New South Wales. 

The biota of the Twofold Shelf bioregion comprises both southern and eastern Australian 

temperate species. Characteristic Twofold Shelf invertebrate species include the sea urchins 

Centrostephanus rodgersii and Phyllacanthus parvispinus, tent shell Astralium tentoriformis 

and the packhorse lobster Jasus verreauxi. The fish fauna are the most distinguishing 

component of the bioregion, including species such as eastern blue groper Achoerodus 

viridis, eastern kelp fish Aplodactylus lophodon, eastern goatfish Upeinichthys lineatus, 

eastern hulafish Trachinops taeniatus and white ear Parma microlepis. The Twofold Shelf 

bioregion seaweeds are characterised by the general absence of green algal and 

filamentous brown and red turf species. The algal assemblages are typified by the common 

presence of the thallose red species Rhodymenia obtusa, R. linearis and Lophurella 

periclados. There have been limited studies on seaweeds in the region, but a considerable 

number of rare and new species have been documented (Edmunds et al. 2001; Kraft 2001) 

Although assemblages were generally comprised of species characteristic of the bioregion, 

there is also substantial site-to-site variation in accordance with the reef environment, 

particularly depth and exposure. 

3.2 Macroalgae 

There were distinct and consistent differences in algal assemblage structure between the 

Beware Reef, Point Hicks and Cape Howe regions (Figure 3.1). Differences were principally 

in the species composition of the algal canopy and the relative contribution to the 

understorey of fleshy algal species and encrusting coralline algae. At Cape Howe, the algal 

canopy generally consisted of monospecific stands of crayweed Phyllospora comosa. The 

algal understorey at Cape Howe was dominated by encrusting coralline algae, with only 

sparse cover of erect fleshy understorey species. Sites at Beware Reef and Point Hicks were 

similar in that they had a mixed algal canopy of Phyllospora comosa and common kelp 

Ecklonia radiata. These areas also generally had a higher cover of fucalean species, such as 

Cystophora spp. and Sargassum spp., and fleshy thallose red algae. Encrusting coralline 

algae were less abundant at Point Hicks and Beware Reef. 

Each site tended to have a characteristic algal assemblage structure. Although there was 

variation in algal assemblage structure over time, the differences between sites and between 

regions were relatively maintained (Figures 3.2 to 3.4). The greatest degree of algal 

assemblage variation was in the cape Howe region (Figure 3.4), which can be attributed to 

the low and variable abundances of understorey species, and changes in Phyllospora 

canopy cover. 

Algal species richness had an increasing trend at the two Beware Reef region sites (Sites 23 

and 24; Appendix Figure A2.1). There was a marked increase in algal species richness at the 

two Iron Prince sites between 2004, 2006 and 2009 (Sites 12 and 16; Appendix Figure A1.1). 

Algal species diversity (Hill’s N 2 ) decreased between the surveys of 2004, 2006 and 2009 at 

Old Jetty Bay (Site 4; Appendix Figure A2.2). There were no obvious changes in algal 

diversity at the other sites. 

18



Beware Reef MPA 

▲ Beware Reef Reference 

S21 

Point Hicks MPA 

▲ Point Hicks Reference 

Cape Howe MPA 

▲ Cape Howe Reference 

S4 

S7 

S24 

S23 

S6 

S16 S17 S18 

S19 

S22 

S12 

S20 

S13 

S26 

S8 

S14 

S10 

S15 

S11 

S25 

S27 

Figure 3.1. MDS plot of algal assemblage structure in the Twofold Shelf bioregion in 

March 2004. Kruskal stress = 0.15. 

S24 

S23 

SITE 

3223 MPA 

3224 Ref 

Figure 3.2. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at Beware Reef MS and 

reference sites (data from Figure 3.1). 

19



S21 

S16 

S17 S18 

S4 

S7 

S6 

S22 

SITE 

Figure 3.3. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at Point Hicks MNP and 


3204 MPA 

3206 MPA 

3207 Ref 

3216 Ref 

3217 Ref 

3218 Ref 

3221 MPA 

3222 MPA 

S19 

SITE 

S13 

S14 

S12 

S15 

S26 

S25 

S20 

S8 

S11 

S27 

3208 Ref 

3210 Ref 

3211 Ref 

3212 Ref 

3213 MPA 

3214 MPA 

3215 MPA 

3219 Ref 

3220 MPA 

3225 Ref 

3226 Ref 

3227 MPA 

Figure 3.4. Temporal changes in algal assemblage structure at sites in the Cape Howe 

MNP and reference sites (data from Figure 3.1). 

20



30 

Algae Species Richness - Beware Reef 

Species Count 

20 

10 

0 

30 

Marine Sanctuary 

Species Count 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.5. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and reference sites. 

30 

Algae Species Richness - Point Hicks 

Species Count 

20 

10 

0 

30 

Marine National Park 

Species Count 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.6. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and reference sites. 

21



30 

Algae Species Richness - Cape Howe 

Species Count 

20 

10 

0 

30 


Species Count 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.7. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in for Cape Howe 

Marine National Park and reference sites. 

12 

Algae Species Diversity - Beware Reef 

Hill N2 

8 

4 


0 

12 

Hill N2 

8 

4 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.8. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and reference sites. 

22



12 

Algae Species Diversity - Point Hicks 

Hill N2 

8 

4 


0 

12 

Hill N2 

8 

4 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.9. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park and reference sites. 

12 

Algae Species Diversity - Cape Howe 

Hill N2 

8 

4 


0 

12 

Hill N2 

8 

4 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.10. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine National 


23



3.3 Invertebrates 

There are approximately four invertebrate assemblage types observed in the Twofold Shelf 

Region: 

A Phyllospora-Ecklonia habitat group that includes sites from Beware Reef, Pearl Point, 

Muller Reef and Petrel Point (centre of Figure 3.11). 

An urchin barren group including sites from Gabo and Tullaberga Islands (upper right of 

Figure 3.11). 

A Point Hicks group (lower centre of Figure 3.11). 

A Cape Howe seaweed group, including sites at the Iron Prince and Cape Howe (middle 

left of Figure 3.11). 

In general, reference sites at Point Hicks were characterised by high abundances of the 

predatory gastropod Cabestana spengleri, the seastar Meridiastra calcar and moderate 

abundances of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra and the red bait crab Plagusia chabrus. There 

were typically higher abundances of large herbivorous invertebrates at Cape Howe. These 

included the sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii, blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra, the 

periwinkle Turbo undulatus and another turban shell Astralium tentoriformis. 

Components of the Beware Reef sites were similar to both the Point Hicks and Cape Howe 

reefs. For example, large numbers of the feather star Comanthus trichoptera were observed 

at both Beware Reef and Point Hicks sites. High densities of C. rodgersii and abalone H. 

rubra at Beware Reef sites was a characteristic similar to Cape Howe reefs. 

There were characteristics of the invertebrate assemblages distinctive to each site and this 

distinctiveness was maintained throughout the survey period (Figures 3.12 to 3.14). 

There were no major changes in invertebrate species richness over the monitoring period. 

There was an apparent decreasing trend at Hicks Joggle (Site 22; Appendix Figure A2.3). 

Notable changes in invertebrate species diversity occurred at Beware Reef MS, with a 

decreasing trend between 2004, 2006 and 2008 (Site 23; Appendix Figure A2.4). There was 

a rapid increase in diversity at Iron Prince West between 2006 and 2009 (Site 12; Appendix 

Figure A2.4). 

24



S8 

S11 

S23 

S15 

S24 

S27 

S14 

S25 

S17 

S26 

S18 

S10 

S19 

S20 

S13 

S12 

S7 

S21 

S6 



S16 

S22 

S4 



Cape Howe MPA 


Figure 3.11. MDS plot of invertebrate assemblage structure in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion in March 2004. Kruskal stress = 0.10. 

S24 

S23 

SITE 

3223 MPA 

3224 Ref 

Figure 3.12. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Beware Reef MS 

and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11). 

25



S18 

S17 

SITE 

S16 

S7 

S22 

S21 

S6 

S4 

3204 MPA 

3206 MPA 

3207 Ref 

3216 Ref 

3217 Ref 

3218 Ref 

3221 MPA 

3222 MPA 

Figure 3.13. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Point Hicks MNP 

and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11). 

S8 

S11 

S14 

S15 

S27 

S25 

S26 

S19 

S20 

SITE 

S12 

S13 

3208 Ref 

3210 Ref 

3211 Ref 

3212 Ref 

3213 MPA 

3214 MPA 

3215 MPA 

3219 Ref 

3220 MPA 

3225 Ref 

3226 Ref 

3227 MPA 

Figure 3.14. Temporal changes in invertebrate assemblage structure at Cape Howe 

MNP and reference sites (data from Figure 3.11). 

26



Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Invertebrate Species Richness - Beware Reef 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.15. Invertebrate species richness index for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and 

reference sites. 

Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Invertebrate Species Richness - Point Hicks 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.16. Invertebrate species richness index for Point Hicks Marine National Park 

and reference sites. 

27



Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Invertebrate Species Richness - Cape Howe 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.17. Invertebrate species richness index for Cape Howe Marine National Park 


Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

8 

6 

4 

2 

Invertebrate Species Diversity - Beware Reef 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.18. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

and reference site. 

28



Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

8 

6 

4 

2 

Invertebrate Species Diversity - Point Hicks 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.19. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine 


Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

8 

6 

4 

2 

Invertebrate Species Diversity - Cape Howe 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.20. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine 


29



3.4 Fish 

The fish assemblages found within the monitoring sites were typical of both eastern and 

southern temperate waters. Common species such as the mado Atypichthys strigatus, 

banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis, rock cale Aplodactylus lophodon and purple 

wrasse Notolabrus fucicola were regularly observed at most of the monitoring sites. 

There were distinct differences in fish assemblage structure between the Beware Reef, Point 

Hicks and Cape Howe regions (Figure 3.21). Fish assemblages at Point Hicks were 

dominated by increased densities of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus and purple 

wrasse Notolabrus fucicola. The overall abundance of wrasses was lower at Cape Howe, 

however there was a greater variety of wrasse species present, including the Maori wrasse 

Ophthalmolepis lineolata. Fish that were more abundant in the Cape Howe region included 

herring cale Odax cyanomelas, six spined leatherjacket Meuschenia freycineti, striped mado 

Atypichthys strigatus and the damselfishes Parma microlepis and Chromis hypsilepis. 

Unlike the algal and invertebrate assemblages, the sites within each region were less 

distinctive in terms of the fish fauna, with considerable overlap in assemblage structures 

between sites over time (Figures 3.23 and 3.24). Sites with distinctive assemblages 

maintained through time were Beware Reef MS and Pearl Point (Sites 23 and 24; Figure 

3.22) and Gabo Monument and Gabo Harbour (Sites 10 and 11; Figure 3.24). 

Fish species diversity was highest during the 2009 surveys at Howe West, Howe Central, 

Iron Prince West and Iron Prince Wreck (Sites 13, 14, 12 and 19; Appendix Figure A2.6). 

Beware Reef is an isolated offshore reef. The principal difference between this site and 

others were the very high densities of butterfly perch Caesioperca lepidoptera. High densities 

of this fish are generally associated with reefs of high relief with extension into deep water, 

such as at Beware Reef. The Beware Reef reference site grouped relatively closely to the 

Point Hicks sites (Figure 3.21). It should be noted the diversity statistic for Beware Reef 

fishes was apparently low, with a dominance of butterfly perch Caesioperca lepidoptera. 

Aside from the dominance of this species, the diversity of the remaining species was 

considered high. 

Fish species richness was highest within the Cape Howe MNP during 2009 (Sites 13, 14 and 

15; Appendix Figure A2.5). Species richness was sustained at a relatively high level from 

2004 to 2009 at Iron Prince Wreck (Site 19; Appendix Figure A2.5). 

There were no consistent differences in fish species richness between locations surveyed. In 

general, fish species diversity was higher at Point Hicks than Cape Howe. This reflects the 

more even abundance of a few dominant species at Point Hicks, particularly Notolabrus 

tetricus and N. fucicola, Odax cyanomeles and Atypichthys strigatus. In contrast, sites at 

Cape Howe tended to be dominated (at least numerically) by a single species – typically 

striped mado Atypichthys strigatus, species of damselfish, eastern hulafish Trachinops 

taeniatus or yellow tail mackerel Trachurus novaezelandiae. 

30



S11 



S27 

S20 

S15 

S13 

S26 

S10 



Cape Howe MPA 


S19 

S25 

S14 

S8 

S21 

S12 

S23 

S4 

S22 

S6 S24 

S18 

S17 

S7 

S16 

Figure 3.21. MDS plot of fish assemblage structure in the Twofold Shelf bioregion in March 2004. 

Kruskal stress = 0.18. 

S23 

S24 

SITE 

3223 MPA 

3224 Ref 

Figure 3.22. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Beware Reef MS and 


31



S21 

S4 

S22 

S7 

S16 

S6 

S18 

S17 

SITE 

3204 MPA 

3206 MPA 

3207 Ref 

3216 Ref 

3217 Ref 

3218 Ref 

3221 MPA 

3222 MPA 

Figure 3.23. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Point Hicks MNP and 

references (data from Figure 3.21). 

S11 

S15 

S27 

S20 

S13 

S26 

S19 

S25 

S14 

S8 

S12 

SITE 

3208 Ref 

3210 Ref 

3211 Ref 

3212 Ref 

3213 MPA 

3214 MPA 

3215 MPA 

3219 Ref 

3220 MPA 

3225 Ref 

3226 Ref 

3227 MPA 

Figure 3.24. Temporal changes in fish assemblage structure at Cape Howe MNP and 


32



25 

Fish Species Richness - Beware Reef 

Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.25. Fish species richness index for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and 


25 

Fish Species Richness - Point Hicks 

Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.26. Fish species richness index for Point Hicks Marine National Park and 


33



25 

Fish Species Richness - Cape Howe 

Species Count 

Species Count 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.27. Fish species richness index for Cape Howe Marine National Park and 


10 

Fish Species Diversity - Beware Reef 

Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.28. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 


34



10 

Fish Species Diversity - Point Hicks 

Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.29. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Point Hicks Marine National Park 


10 

Fish Species Diversity - Cape Howe 

Hill N2 

Hill N2 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 3.30. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for Cape Howe Marine National Park 


35



4 BEWARE REEF MARINE SANCTUARY 

4.1 Site Descriptions 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary is a small isolated reef located approximately 4 km offshore 

from Cape Conran. The central position is located on the eastern side of an emergent rock, 

with transects 1 and 2 along the northern side of the island and transects 3 and 4 along the 

southern side (forming a ‘v’). The Beware Reef monitoring site (Site 23) was positioned along 

the 8 m isobath over small gullies and flats. The reef profile in the shallower water consists of 

small gullies, slopes and flats down to the ten meter isobath, where the reef generally drops 

off steeply into deeper water. 

A reference monitoring site was located at Pearl Point (Figure 4.1). The habitat structure at 

Pearl Point was similar to Müller’s Reef and Petrel Point, consisting of ridges of reef 1-2 m 

high with gullies in between. The Pearl Point monitoring site is at 7-8 m depth. 

Pearl 

Point 

Cape 

Conran 

Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary 

Figure 4.1. Location of monitoring sites associated with Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary. The 

sanctuary is shaded blue. Coordinate system is Map Grid of Australia 1996 (MGA). 


The algal composition of Beware Reef reflects the submaximally exposed conditions. The 

major canopy species are bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum and crayweed Phyllospora comosa, 

with a lesser contribution by the common kelp Ecklonia radiata. 

Between the 2006 and 2009 surveys, there was a slight decrease in abundance of common 

kelp E. radiata at Beware Reef, corresponding with a slight increase in P. comosa 

abundance (Figure 4.2 and 4.3). The opposite pattern was observed at the Pearl Point 

reference site: there was an increase in E. radiata abundance corresponding with a decrease 

in P. comosa abundance. 

At Beware Reef, crustose coralline algae increased from 5% to 24% during 2006 and 

subsequently decreased to 2% cover in 2009. There was no corresponding trend at Pearl 

Point (Figure 4.4). 

36



Durvillaea potatorum, was only present at Beware Reef (Figure 4.5). This is a large robust 

species adapted to living in highly exposed conditions. Durvillaea potatorum had increased in 

abundance between 2006 to 2009 by 16%. This coincided with decreases in the abundance 

of E. radiata. 

There were no obvious trends or changes in the understorey algae, which included 

Rhodymenia wilsonii, Plocamium dilatatum and R. linearis. 

80 

Ecklonia radiata- Beware Reef 

Percent Cover 

Percent Cover 

60 

40 

20 

0 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.2. Abundances (percent cover) of kelp Ecklonia radiata in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

37



80 

Phyllospora comosa- Beware Reef 

Percent Cover 

Percent Cover 

60 

40 

20 

0 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.3. Abundances (percent cover) of Phyllospora comosa in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 


Percent Cover 

Percent Cover 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

Crustose Coralline Algae - Beware Reef 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.4. Abundances (percent cover) of crustose coralline algae in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 


38



60 

Durvillaea potatorum- Beware Reef 

Percent Cover 

40 

20 

0 

60 


Percent Cover 

40 

20 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.5. Abundances (percent cover) of Durvillaea potatorum in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 



A distinctive feature of both the Beware Reef and Pearl Point sites was the exceptionally high 

abundances of Comanthus trichoptera. The abundances were much higher (more than 10 

times) at Pearl Point, however, the temporal changes had a similar pattern at both sites 

(Figure 4.6). The greatest changes were from 2006 to 2009, with densities of 1153 and 7812 

per 200 m² at Beware Reef and Pearl Point respectively (Figure 4.6). 

There was an apparent increase in abundance of abalone Haliotis rubra at Beware Reef to 

the latest survey in 2009 (Figure 4.8). This change was not evident at the reference site. 

There was no detected change in size of H. rubra at either site (Figure 4.10). 

The change in abundance over time of the common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma 

were inconsistent between the two sites. At Pearl Point, there was an apparent decline from 

93 to 24 per 200 m² between 2004 and 2009 (Figure 4.9). 

The tent shell Astralium tentoriformis was notably abundant at Pearl Point during 2004 (55 

per 200 m²), however few individuals were observed in 2009. 

39



2000 

Comanthus trichoptera- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

1500 

1000 

500 


0 

8000 

Abundance 

6000 

4000 

2000 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.6. Densities (per 200 m²) of feather star Comanthus trichoptera in Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

Abundance 

200 

150 

100 

50 

Centrostephanus rodgersii - Beware Reef 


0 

200 

Abundance 

150 

100 

50 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.7. Densities (per 200 m²) of long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii in Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

40



200 

Haliotis rubra- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

150 

100 

50 


0 

200 

Abundance 

150 

100 

50 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.8. Densities (per 200 m²) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra in Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

150 

Heliocidaris erythrogramma- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

100 

50 


0 

150 

Abundance 

100 

50 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.9. Densities (per 200 m²) of common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma in Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

41



180 

Haliotis rubrasizes - Beware Reef 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 


60 

180 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 

Reference 

60 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Figure 4.10. Mean sizes (mm ± 25 standard error) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra at Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and at the Pearl Point reference site. 

4.4 Fishes 

A distinctive feature of the fish assemblage at Beware Reef is the high abundance of butterfly 

perch Caesioperca lepidoptera. This reflects the presence of their preferred habitat: steep, 

high profile reef that extends up from deeper water. The rosy wrasse Pseudolabrus 

rubicundus, also typical of higher relief reefs, was observed in low numbers during the 2004 

and 2006 surveys. The abundance of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus halved 

between 2004 and 2006 but was relatively stable between 2006 and 2009. The abundance 

of purple wrasse N. fucicola approximately doubled between 2006 and 2009 (Figure 4.12 

and 4.13). 

At Pearl Point, the abundances of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus fluctuated 

between surveys: 40 to 10 to 37 per 200m² in 2004, 2006 and 2009 respectively (Figure 

4.12). There was also a large increase in purple wrasse N. fucicola abundance between 

2006 and 2009 (Figure 4.13). This coincided with decreased observations of sweep Scorpis 

lineolata, white-ear Parma microlepis and herring cale Odax cyanomelas. 

42



Figure 4.11. Aggregation of butterfly perch Caesioperca lepidoptera. 

There was little difference in the modes and ranges of the size distributions of N. tetricus and 

N. fucicola at both Beware Reef and Pearl Point between the 2004 and 2009 surveys (Figure 

4.16). There was a notable absence of medium sized N. tetricus at Beware Reef during 2009 

(Figure 4.17). There was no apparent change in the size spectra of all fishes at the two sites 

(Figure 4.18). 

50 

Notolabrus tetricus- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

40 

30 

20 

10 


0 

50 

Abundance 

40 

30 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.12. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus in Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site. 

43



60 

Notolabrus fucicola- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

40 

20 


0 

60 

Abundance 

40 

20 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.13. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse, Notolabrus fucicola, in Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site. 

30 

Odax cyanomelas- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.14. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas in Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site. 

44



30 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis- Beware Reef 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 4.15. Densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis in 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary and at Pearl Point reference site. 

35 

Notolabrus fucicloasizes - Beware Reef 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 


0 

35 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 4.16. Purple wrasse, Notolabrus fucicola, size-densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) in Beware Reef 

Marine Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site. 

45



35 

Notolabrus tetricussizes - Beware Reef 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 


0 

35 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 4.17. Blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus size-densities (number per 2000 m 2 ) in Beware 

Reef Marine Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site. 

80 

Reef fish sizes - Beware Reef 

Abundance 

60 

40 

20 


0 

80 

Abundance 

60 

40 

20 

0 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 4.18. Size-densities of all observed reef fishes (number per 2000 m 2 ) in Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary and Pearl Point reference site. 

46



5 POINT HICKS MARINE NATIONAL PARK 


The reef substratum within the Point Hicks Marine National Park consisted of granite slopes, 

boulders and outcrops. There are four sites within the Point Hicks Marine National Park: Old 

Jetty Bay (Site 4), Hicks Southwest (Site 21), Hicks Joggle (Site 22) and Hicks Lighthouse 

(Site 6). 

Old Jetty Bay (Site 4; Figure 5.1) is located on the western side of the point where it is 

relatively sheltered and shallow and consists of flat rock slabs with low boulders with 

occasional bombies. Some areas of boulders and cobble were interspersed with sand. 

The three other sites within the Marine National Park were highly exposed to swell and seas. 

Hicks Southwest (Site 21) has both low and moderate relief (1-1.5 m), with steps, bombies 

and reef flats. There are patches of sand in the rock gullies and over rock flats. 

Hicks Joggle (Site 22) is situated beneath the lighthouse and is highly exposed, but has a 

small barrier reef in front of it which breaks up smaller swell waves. Larger waves continue 

over this reef and break on the steep shore. While the barrier reef protects the inner reef to 

some extent, a current frequently flows along the coast, between the barrier reef and the 

shore. This interacts with swells and backwash from the shore to make it a turbulent area 

(hence the name). The site is characterised by moderate to high granite boulders and 

outcrops (1.5-2 m) with low relief boulder habitat in the western end, where there are also 

large sand patches. 

Hicks Lighthouse (Site 6) is situated on the eastern side of the point and is fully exposed to 

easterly swells. Although the aspect of this site is sheltered from westerly swells, the waves 

refract around the point and break over the site. 

The reference sites for Point Hicks Marine National Park are all situated to the east, where 

the closest suitable reefs were present. Kraft’s Garden and Durvillaea Flats (Sites 7 and 16) 

are close together along a rocky reef outcrop immediately to the east of Point Hicks. Both 

sites consisted of gently sloping low-profile reef punctuated by bombies and outcrops 1-2 m 

high and interspersed with sandy patches. Ground swell surge is particularly strong at these 

sites, with sand continually being resuspended in the water column, reducing visibility. 

The habitats at Müller’s Reef and Petrel Point (Sites 17 and 18) were similar to that observed 

at Pearl Point (and also similar to Bemm River reef). These reefs consisted of reef with 1-2 m 

high ridges with gullies in between. Some areas of low-profile reef were also observed. Both 

these sites are prone to strong ground surge and high wave action. 

47



Petrel 

Point 

Point 

Hicks 

Point Hicks 

Marine National 

Park 

Figure 5.1. Location of monitoring sites associated with Point Hicks Marine National Park. The park 

area is shaded blue. Coordinate system is Map Grid of Australia 1996 (MGA). 


Crayweed Phyllospora comosa is the dominant canopy former at the two eastern sites within 

Point Hicks MNP, Hicks Joggle and Hicks Lighthouse (Sites 22 and 6), as well as at the two 

adjacent reference sites, Krafts Garden and Durvillaea Flats (Sites 7 and 16). Abundances 

were in the order of 60% cover at these sites. Phyllospora comosa was also abundant at the 

other monitoring sites (10-30% cover), where there tended to be dominance of common kelp 

Ecklonia radiata. Ecklonia was particularly abundant at the reference sites Müllers Reef and 

Petrel Point (Sites 17 and 18). 

The time trends for all seaweed species were quite different between sites within and outside 

the MNP. It was noted that particular reference sites had trends matching those of sites 

within the MNP. This was most evident for Phyllospora comosa (Figure 5.2; Appendix Figure 

A2.7): Old Jetty Bay (Site 4) c.f. Krafts Garden (Site 7); Hicks Southwest and Hicks Joggle 

(Sites 21 and 22) c.f. Durvillaea Flats (Site 16); and Hicks Light (site 6) c.f. Petrel Point (Site 

18). These apparent site relationships were also reflected in the abundance of other algal 

species, but to a weaker extent. These relationships will be scrutinised further following 

additional surveys to establish whether this indicates linked ecological processes or is mere 

coincidence. 

Old Jetty Bay (Site 4) had considerable changes in seaweed abundances over the 

monitoring period. In 2001, this site was initially dominated by stands of crayweed P. comosa 

and string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia, but also low profile boulder habitat with a mixture of 

thallose red algae interspersed by sand. The Macrocystis angustifolia had disappeared by 

2006 and was not present in 2007 (Figure 5.7). By 2009, the boulder habitat was more sand 

scoured with few thallose algae present. Concurrent changes included increased 

abundances of the brown strap weed Cystophora moniliformis, red alga Rhodymenia linearis 

and crustose coralline algae (Figures 5.4 to 5.6). The abundances of Ecklonia radiata and 

brown alga Acrocarpia paniculata peaked and declined at Old Jetty Bay over the monitoring 

period (Figure 5.7 and Appendix Figures A2.8 and A2.12). 

Low profile reef at Krafts Garden (Site 7) in 2001 was generally sand affected with high 

species richness of thallose red algae. The coverage of Phyllospora comosa has 

48



subsequently increased with a corresponding decrease in abundances and species richness 

of thallose red algal species. 

Other notable seaweed changes were: 

Increasing trend in Phyllospora comosa at Krafts Garden (Site 7) and decreasing trend at 

Müllers Reef (Site 17; Appendix Figure A2.7). 

Increased abundance of Ecklonia radiata in 2009 at Hicks Southwest (Site 21; Appendix 

Figure A2.8) and sustained abundances of Rhodymenia linearis at this site (Appendix 

Figure A2.10). 

Persistence of bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum at Durvillaea Flats (Site 16; Figure 5.7), 

which can be considered a sentinel species for climate change. 

100 

Phyllospora comosa- Point Hicks 

Percent cover 

Percent cover 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.2. Site abundances (percent cover) of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Point Hicks Marine 


49



80 

Ecklonia radiata- Point Hicks 

Percent cover 

Percent cover 

60 

40 

20 

0 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.3. Site abundances (percent cover) of common kelp Ecklonia radiata at Point Hicks Marine 


15 

Cystophora moniliformis- Point Hicks 

Percent cover 

10 

5 

0 

15 


Percent cover 

10 

5 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.4. Site abundances (percent cover) of brown strapweed Cystophora moniliformis at Point 

Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. 

50



15 

Rhodymenia linearis- Point Hicks 

Percent cover 

10 

5 

0 

15 


Percent cover 

10 

5 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.5. Site abundances (percent cover) of red understorey alga Rhodymenia linearis at Point 


15 

Crustose Coralline Algae - Point Hicks 

Percent cover 

10 

5 

0 

15 


Percent cover 

10 

5 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.6. Site abundances (percent cover) of crustose coralline algae at Point Hicks Marine National 


51



Percent cover 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

5 

Macrocustis angustifolia 

Site 3204 - Point Hicks MNP 

Percent cover 

4 

3 

2 

1 

Acrocarpia paniculata 

Site 3204 - Point Hicks MNP 

0 

5 

Percent cover 

4 

3 

2 

1 

Durvillaea potatorum 

Site 3216 - Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.7. Abundances (percent cover) of seaweeds of interest at selected Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and reference sites: string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia; wiry brown weed Acrocarpia 

paniculata; and bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; and (3216) Durvillaea 

Flats. 


The most abundant invertebrate observed during the surveys was the feather star 

Comanthus trichoptera. This species was a prevalent component of an Ecklonia filter feeding 

assemblage observed at Müllers Reef and Petrel reef (Sites 17 and 18), as well as at Pearl 

Point (as described in the previous section). This community is also known to occur in deep 

water at Bemm River reef (Edmunds et al. 2001). The reef substratum in these communities 

typically has a high cover of sponges and C. trichoptera arms protruding from numerous 

interstices created by the reef, sponges and Ecklonia holdfasts. The density of C. trichoptera 

occurs in the thousands per 200 m 2 in these habitats (Figure 5.8). There was a notable 

increase in C. trichoptera abundance at Hicks Southwest (Site 21; Appendix Figure A2.13). 

The seastar Meridiastra calcar also occurred in relatively high densities, particularly on sandy 

reefs such as Old Jetty Bay (Site 4), Hicks Southwest (Site 21) and Hicks Lighthouse (Site 7; 

Appendix Figure A2.14). This species was highly variable between survey times with no 

apparent patterns or trends (Figure 5.9). 

The trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri was abundant on the more exposed Phyllospora 

habitat, from Hicks Southwest (Site 21) in the west to Durvillaea Flats (Site 16) to the east. 

The abundances were highly variable between surveys (Figure 5.10). 

Since declaration of the Point Hicks MNP, the abundance of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra 

have increased at the two eastern sites of Hicks Joggle (Site 22) and Hicks Lighthouse (Site 

52



7), but not at Old Jetty Bay or Hicks Southwest (Sites 4 and 21; Appendix Figure A2.16). 

There has also been an apparent increase in abundances at the reference sites Krafts 

Garden and Durvillaea Flats (Sites 7 and 16; Appendix Figure A2.16). There were no marked 

changes in sizes of H. rubra over time, although there was a slight decrease in the median 

size at Hicks Southwest and a slight increase at Hicks Joggle (Sites 21 and 22; Appendix 

Figure A2.17). Median sizes were generally slightly lower at Müllers Reef and Petrel Point 

(Sites 17 and 18; Appendix Figure A2.17). 

The common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma is not a predominant assemblage 

component within the Point Hicks MNP, but is at the reference sites, excepting Durvillaea 

Flats (Figure 5.13; Appendix Figure A2.18). Temporal patterns were similar between Krafts 

Garden and Müllers Reef, however there was a relatively large decline in density between 

2006 and 2009 at Petrel Point (Appendix Figure A2.18). 

The abundances and temporal changes of other common invertebrates was highly variable 

between sites and times with few recognisable patterns at this stage (e.g. Figures 5.15 and 

5.16). 

500 

Comanthus tricoptera - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 


Abundance 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1000 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.8. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the feather star Comanthus trichoptera at Point Hicks 


53



2600 

Meridiastra calcar- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

1950 

1300 

650 

0 

2600 

1950 

1300 

650 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.9. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the seastar Meridiastra calcar at Point Hicks Marine 


220 

Cabestana spengleri- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

165 

110 

55 

0 

220 

165 

110 

55 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.10. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri at Point Hicks 


54



200 

Haliotis rubra- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

150 

100 

50 

0 

200 

150 

100 

50 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.11. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Point Hicks Marine 


180 

Haliotis rubrasizes - Point Hicks 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 


60 

180 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 

Reference 

60 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.12. Mean sizes (mm ± standard error) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Point Hicks Marine 


55



120 

Heliocidaris erythrogramma- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

80 

40 


0 

120 

Abundance 

80 

40 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.13. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma at 

Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. 

30 

Plagusia chabrus- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.14. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the red bait crab Plagusia chabrus at Point Hicks 


56



100 

Centrostephanus rodgersii - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.15. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii at 


40 

Turbo undulatus- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

30 

20 

10 

0 

40 

30 

20 

10 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.16. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the turban shell Turbo undulatus at Point Hicks Marine 


57



5.4 Fish 

The fish fauna was dominated by the blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus and purple 

wrasse N. fucicola, with the abundance of N. fucicola being approximately double that of N. 

tetricus (Figures 5.18 to 5.21). The time trends for both species were relatively similar at 

Hicks Southwest and Hicks Joggle within the MNP (Sites 21 and 22) and at Durvillaea Flats, 

Müllers Reef and Petrel Reef reference sites (Sites 16 to 18). These sites had a decline in 

abundance between 2004 and 2006, with minor changes to 2009 (Appendix Figures A2.22 

and A2.23). There was a decreasing trend in abundance of both N. tetricus and N. fucicola at 

Hicks Lighthouse between 2004 and 2009 (Appendix Figures A2.22 and A2.23). Abundances 

of N. tetricus were very low at Krafts Garden during the 2009 survey (Appendix Figure 

A2.22). 

Considerably fewer small N. tetricus were observed at Old Jetty Bay in 2009 compared with 

2004. Densities of smaller N. tetricus were lower at Müller Reef and Petrel Point in 2009. The 

size structure of N. fucicola was generally similar at most sites between 2004 and 2009. 

There were more large individuals observed at Krafts Garden in 2009. 

The kelp feeding species herring cale Odax cyanomelas was abundant at all sites with the 

exception of Old Jetty Bay (Site 4). Abundances at all sites, except Old Jetty Bay, increased 

between 2004 and 2006, followed by a substantial decline to 2009 (Figure 5.22). Few large 

fish were observed in 2009 compared with 2004 (Figure 5.23). 

Banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis also occurred at all sites but was generally more 

abundant within the Point Hicks MNP (Figure 5.24). Abundances during 2009 were generally 

lower than observed previously at each site. Although abundances were low in 2009, there 

was little indication of any differences in size structure between 2004 and 2009 (Figure 5.25). 

The size spectra for all fishes at each site were generally similar between 2004 and 2009, 

although there appeared to be fewer larger fish at Old Jetty Bay and Hicks Southeast (Figure 

5.26). 

The eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus lophodon was moderately abundant at most sites during 

2004 or 2006. Abundances were generally low in 2001 and 2009 (Figure 5.27). Abundances 

at Hicks Lighthouse (Site 6) followed an opposite trend, with higher abundances in 2001 and 

2009 and a dip in abundance in 2004 (Appendix Figure A2.26). 

A similar kelpfish, Chironemus marmoratus, was observed for the first time during the 2009 

surveys at all sites within the MNP (2-4 individuals per 2000 m 2 ) and one fish was observed 

at Petrel Point (Site 18). It is possible this species may have been present in previous years 

and misidentified as A. lophodon, however the increased prevalence in 2009 is considered to 

be real. 

Sea sweep Scorpis aequipinnis is present in low abundances (1-6 individuals per 2000 m 2 ) at 

most sites on nearly all survey occasions within Point Hicks MNP. Few were observed 

outside the MNP, with three observed at Krafts Garden (Site 7) during 2004. 

Aggregations of Port Jackson sharks Heterodontus portusjacksoni are occasionally observed 

at Hicks Southwest (2004; Site 21) and Müllers Reef (2006; Site 17), with smaller 

aggregations observed at Old Jetty Bay (2004, 2006; Site 4). 

The schooling species Trachurus novaezelandiae, T. declivis, Arripis spp. and Pseudocaranx 

dentex were also sporadically observed during the monitoring period, with the highest 

frequencies and largest schools at Hicks Joggle (2004, 2006; Site 22). 

58



Figure 5.17. Banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Sensation Reef, Point Hicks 


50 

Notolabrus tetricusi- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Abundance 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.18. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at 


59



50 

Notolabrus tetricussizes - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

Length (mm) 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 


Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 5.19. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at Point 


120 

Notolabrus fucicola- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

80 

40 


0 

120 

Abundance 

80 

40 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.20. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Point 


60



90 

Notolabrus fucicloasizes - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

60 

30 


0 

90 

Length (mm) 

60 

30 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 5.21. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Point Hicks 


30 

Odax cyanomelas- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.22. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Point Hicks 


61



35 

Odax cyanomelassizes - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 


0 

35 

Length (mm) 

28 

21 

14 

7 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 5.23. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Point Hicks 


40 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

30 

20 

10 


0 

40 

Abundance 

30 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.24. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at 


62



Abundance 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Cheilodactylus spectabilissizes - Point Hicks 


0 

25 

Length (mm) 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 5.25. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at 


300 

Reef fish sizes - Point Hicks 

Abundance 

200 

100 


0 

300 

Abundance 

200 

100 

0 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 5.26. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of all observed reef fishes at Point Hicks Marine 


63



25 

Aplodactylus lophodon- Point Hicks 

Abundance 

20 

15 

10 

5 


0 

25 

Abundance 

20 

15 

10 

5 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 5.27. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus lophodon at 


64



6 CAPE HOWE MARINE NATIONAL PARK 


Three sites, Sites 13, 14 and 15, were positioned over much of the shallow reef within the 

Cape Howe Marine National Park, present only in the north eastern region of the park 

(Figure 6.1). These sites were slightly different in substratum structure, with lower relief reef 

present in the western area (Howe West) and larger bombies, holes and drop-offs present at 

Howe Border. The monitoring program stipulated four sites within the MNP, however the 

limited reef area within shallow waters meant any fourth site could not be well separated from 

the others. For 2004 and 2006, Site 20 was established perpendicular to, and crossing the 

Howe West Site. This was later deemed statistically inappropriate so, in 2009, this site was 

replaced by Site 27 parallel to Howe Central, 75 m apart. This new site was considerably 

deeper (10-12 m). 

Two of the original reference sites for the Cape Howe Marine National Park were located on 

sea urchin barrens on the west coasts of Tullaberga and Gabo Islands (Figure 6.1). These 

sites were selected as they represent an alternative state of reef habitat within the region, as 

opposed to kelp bed habitat. The Gabo Island site was also recognised as having 

conservation value in terms of the fish assemblage. These sites provided a relative reference 

in terms of assessing the direction of community changes within the marine protected area, 

and whether there is a succession toward urchin barrens within the park. The substratum at 

Tullaberga Deep (although only 5-7 m it is called deep because there has also been a survey 

at 2 m depth at that site) was characterised by moderate to high relief bedrock outcrops at 

the southern end, to lower relief rock slabs at the northern end. There were occasional 

patches of boulders and rubble, providing interstitial spaces. Much of the Tullaberga site was 

sea urchin barren habitat with high abundances of Centrostephanus rodgersii and encrusting 

coralline algae. Crayweed Phyllospora comosa was present on occasional boulder tops. The 

Gabo Monument site (near the pump house) was all sea urchin barren on a substratum of 

large granite boulders with a large amount of interstitial space. Small P. comosa clumps were 

present on the tops of occasional large boulders. At both island sites, a predominant feature 

was the high abundance of white ear damselfish Parma microlepis and one spot puller 

Chromis hypsilepis. 

Two other reference sites were positioned on the Iron Prince reef. These two sites have 

similar reef substrata to that observed at sites within the Cape Howe Marine National Park: 

Larger boulders of moderate relief (1-2 m) with patches of relatively flat, slab reef. 

Occasional steps/ledges, dropoffs/wall and cavern habitat are also present. The Iron Prince 

and Cape Howe sites were dominated by a tall canopy of Phyllospora comosa. 

The two urchin barren reference sites on Tullaberga and Gabo Islands were later deemed 

inappropriate for statistical purposes, with a preference for reference sites with similar habitat 

types to those present at the sites inside the Marine National Park. In 2009, these sites were 

substituted by two sites on the eastern side of Gabo Island. Representative Phyllospora 

habitat was not found, with the two new reference sites being dominated by a mixture of 

Phyllospora comosa, Acrocarpia paniculata, smaller brown algae such as Halopteris and 

Zonaria spp., erect coralline algae and crustose coralline algae. The substratum at these 

sites consisted of steep dropoffs from the shore to 7 m depth with boulder fields, rocky 

outcrops and steps at the base. 

65



Cape Howe 

Tullaberga Island 

Cape Howe 

Marine National 

Park 

Gabo Island 

Figure 6.1. Location of monitoring sites at Cape Howe Marine National Park. Marine National 

Park is indicated in shaded grey. Coordinate system is Map Grid of Australia 1996 (MGA). 


Sites within the Cape Howe MNP were dominated by monospecific stands of crayweed 

Phyllospora comosa (Figure 6.2). There were persistently high densities at Howe West, 

Howe Central, as well as at the two Iron Prince reference sites, of 60-90 percent cover 

(Figure 6.2; Appendix Figure A2.27). The dense canopy caused considerable shading of the 

substratum and there was a considerable coverage of sponges and other sessile 

invertebrates underneath, particularly at Howe West (Site 13). There was a considerable 

decline in P. comosa cover at Howe Border (Site 15), reducing from 70% cover in 2001 to 

only 29% cover in 2009 (Figure 6.2; Appendix Figure A2.27). This change was concordant 

with reductions in abundances of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra and increases in 

Centrostephanus rodgersii (discussed below). 

The coverage of crustose coralline algae was considerably higher at Howe Border (Site 15; 

Appendix Figure A2.28), in accordance with the larger area and number of urchin barren 

patches at this site. There were no obvious trends in abundance over the survey period. 

The algal understorey in the Cape Howe region was generally sparse and depauperate of 

species. Common species included the brown alga Carpomitra costata and the red algae 

Delisea pulchra, Rhodymenia linearis, Plocamium angustum and Phacelocarpus 

peperocarpos. More open patches of reef tended to include the smaller brown algae 

Halopteris spp. and Zonaria turneriana and the erect coralline algae Haliptilon roseum, 

Amphiroa anceps and Arthrocardia wardii. The red alga Galaxaura marginata was notably 

abundant only at Howe Perpendicular (Site 20), with 5% and 10% cover in 2004 and 2006. 

There was a notable increase in abundance of the smaller thallose algae between 2006 and 

2009, particularly for Halopteris spp. and Haliptilon roseum (Figures 6.4 and 6.5). Highest 

abundances were also recorded in 2009 for Amphiroa anceps, Carpomitra costata and 

Delisea pulchra. 

66



100 

Phyllospora comosa- Cape Howe 

Percent cover 

Percent cover 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.2. Percent cover of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Cape Howe Marine National 


40 

Crustose Coralline Algae - Cape Howe 

Percent cover 

Percent cover 

30 

20 

10 

0 

40 

30 

20 

10 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.3. Percent cover of crustose coralline algae at Cape Howe Marine National Park and 


67



20 

Halopterisspp - Cape Howe 

Percent cover 

Percent cover 

15 

10 

5 

0 

20 

15 

10 

5 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.4. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine National 


15 

Haliptilon roseum- Cape Howe 

Percent cover 

10 

5 

0 

15 


Percent cover 

10 

5 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.5. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine National 


68




There were relatively few invertebrate species at the Cape Howe monitoring sites. 

The most abundant invertebrate in the region was the long spined sea urchin 

Centrostephanus rodgersii. Within the Cape Howe MNP, abundances were particularly high 

at Howe Border (265-437 per 200 m 2 ). Abundances at the other sites within the MNP were 

generally less than 140 per 200 m 2 . At Howe Border, abundances increased from 265 in 

2001 to remain above 359 per 200 m 2 between 2004 and 2009. Abundances at Howe 

Central in 2009 were triple that observed previously. These changes were not reflected at the 

Iron Prince Phyllospora-dominated reference sites, with a minor increase at one and a 

decreasing trend at the other (Sites 12 and 19; Figure 6.6; Appendix Figure A2.31). The new 

reference site at Gabo Gulch (Site 26) has a high density of C. rodgersii, similar to Howe 

Border (Figure 6.6; Appendix Figure A2.31). 

The urchin barrens at Tullaberga Deep (Site 3208) and Gabo Monument (Site 3210) had 

very high densities of C. rodgersii, of 800-1200 per 200 m 2 . Moderate abundances of 

Astralium tentoriformis, blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra and common sea urchin Heliocidaris 

erythrogramma were associated with these barrens habitats. Other species of large mobile 

invertebrates were uncommon at these sites. 

The abundance of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra was generally in the range of 30-100 

individuals per 200 m 2 inside the Cape Howe MNP (Sites 13, 14 and 15) and at the 

representative Iron Prince Reference sites (Sites 12 and 19; Figure 6.8; Appendix Figure 

A2.33). There was a marked decline in abundance at Howe Border (Site 15) between 2001 

and 2004. There was an equally marked increase in abundance at Howe Central (Site 14) 

from 2006 to 2009. There was a minor increase in abundance from 2006 to 2009 at Howe 

Border (Figure 6.8). Abalone sizes appear to have increased slightly at Howe West (Site 13; 

Figure 6.9; Appendix Figure A2.34). 

Other notable invertebrate changes were: 

Persistent increased abundance in common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma at 

Iron Prince West between 2004 and 2006 (Site 12; Figure 6.10; Appendix Figure A2.35). 

Increasing trend in abundance of trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri at Iron Prince West 

(Site 12) and decreasing trend at Iron Prince Wreck (Site 19; Figure 6.11; Appendix 

Figure A2.36). 

Persistent moderately high abundances (17-25 individuals per 200 m2) of dogwhelk 

Dicathais orbita at Iron Prince Wreck (Site 19). 

Persistently higher abundances (5-11 individuals per 200 m2) of red bait crab Plagusia 

chabrus at Iron Prince West (Site 12) compared with other sites. 

69



Abundance 

Abundance 

450 

360 

270 

180 

90 

0 

450 

360 

270 

180 

90 

Centrostephanus rodgersii- Cape Howe 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.6. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus 

rodgersii at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. 

400 

Turbo undulatus- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

300 

200 

100 

0 

400 

300 

200 

100 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.7. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of turban shell Turbo undulatus at Cape Howe 


70



200 

Haliotis rubra- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

150 

100 

50 

0 

200 

150 

100 

50 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.8. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of black lip abalone Haliotis rubra at Cape 

Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. 

180 

Haliotis rubrasizes - Cape Howe 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 


60 

180 

Length (mm) 

140 

100 

Reference 

60 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.9. Mean sizes (mm ± standard error) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Cape Howe 


71



120 

Heliocidaris erythrogramma- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

80 

40 


0 

120 

Abundance 

80 

40 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.10. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of common sea urchin Heliocidaris 

erythrogramma at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. 

50 

Cabestana spengleri- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.11. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri at Cape 


72



6.4 Fish 

The abundances of the blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus tended to fluctuate at all 

sites between surveys from 2001 to 2006 (Figure 6.12). There was a general increase in 

abundance in the Cape Howe MNP between 2006 and 2009, with the highest recorded 

abundances being in 2009 at Sites 13 to 15 (Appendix Figure A2.37). This increase was not 

reflected at any of the reference sites with time-series data (Sites 12 and 19 in Appendix 

Figure A2.37, but also Sites 8 and 10). There was little evidence fish size increasing between 

2009 and 2004 (Figure 6.13). 

The abundances of purple wrasse N. fucicola had an increasing trend between 2004 and 

2009 within Cape Howe MNP, with the highest densities occurring in 2009 (Figure 6.14). 

There was also a marked increase in density between 2006 and 2009 at the reference site 

Iron Prince Wreck (Site 19) but not at Iron Prince West, where none were observed in 2009 

(Site 12; Appendix Figure A2.38). Observed abundances in 2004 were too low to compare 

changes in size structure over time (Figure 6.15). 

The abundance of herring cale Odax cyanomelas was highly variable between times, there 

being a notable peak in abundance at most sites in 2004 (Figure 6.17). Abundances have 

been persistently higher at Iron Prince Wreck (Site 19; Appendix Figure A2.40). The sizes of 

O. cyanomelas observed in 2009 were considerably smaller than those observed in 2004 


There has been an increasing trend in abundance of banded morwong Cheilodactylus 

spectabilis within the Cape Howe MNP since 2001 (Sites 13 to 15; Appendix Figure A2.41). 

There is no marked increase in density of larger morwong at these sites, however there was 

a higher number of juveniles observed at Howe Central in 2009 (Figure 6.20). A slightly 

higher density of larger fish was observed at the new Howe Deep site in 2009. The density at 

the Iron Prince reference sites remained relatively similar over time (Sites 12 and 19; 

Appendix Figure A2.41). This species can grow up to 1 metre in length. 

The abundance of all fishes in the 12 to 20 cm size classes was considerably higher at Howe 

West, Howe Central and Iron Prince Wreck in 2009 compared with 2004 (Figure 6.21). 

There was a marked increase in the abundance of kelp fish Aplodactylus lophodon in the 

Cape Howe MNP between 2006 and 2009 (Sites 14 and 15, Figure 6.22). This increase was 

from 1-6 fish to 22-24 fish per 2000 m 2 . Abundances were persistently high at Iron Prince 

Wreck over the monitoring period (Site 19; 21-28 individuals per 2000 m 2 ; Appendix Figure 

A2.42) and variable at Iron Prince West (Site 12; Appendix Figure A2.42). This species eats 

seaweeds and the increases may be related to the increased abundance of smaller thallose 

seaweeds at these sites. 

The eastern blue groper Achoerodus viridis was sporadically observed at sites throughout 

the Cape Howe region in low abundances, of generally three or less individuals per 2000 m 2 . 

Nineteen individuals per 2000 m 2 were observed at Howe Central (Site 14) in 2009. These 

individuals were comparatively small, mostly in the 150 and 200 mm size classes with some 

in the 250 and 300 mm size classes. Larger individual females and males were observed 

(approximately 400-450 mm long), but not within the survey transects. This species can grow 

to over 1 m in size. 

The contribution of other species to the fish assemblages varied between sites. The damsel 

fishes, white ear Parma microlepis and the one-spot puller Chromis hypsilepis occurred 

together on the reefs Howe Central (Site 14) and Howe Border (Site 15). These fish occurred 

predominantly in the open barrens habitat created by the urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii. 

Parma microlepis was also present at Howe Perpendicular (Site 20) but in lower numbers. 

Some large individuals of long-finned pike Dinolestes lewini occurred at all sites with highest 

numbers occurring at Howe Perpendicular (Site 20) during the second survey. 

73



Stripey mado Atypichthys strigatus occurred at all sites and was the most abundant species, 

but fluctuated greatly in abundance between sites and times. The highest densities were at 

Gabo Monument (Site 10) and Prince Wreck (Site 19). 

The large area of urchin barren habitat at Gabo Monument (Site 10) and Tullaberga Deep 

(Site 8) had distinctive fish assemblages. Few individuals of the kelp feeding herring cale 

Odax cyanomelas occurred at these barrens sites. The urchin barren habitat at the island 

sites also supported the highest densities of the damselfishes Parma microlepis and Chromis 

hypsilepis and the eastern hulafish Trachinops taeniatus. 

Occasional schools of jack mackerel Trachurus novaezelandiae and trevally Pseudocaranx 

dentex were observed at sites in the Cape Howe region. 

100 

Notolabrus tetricusi- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.12. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at 

Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. 

74



50 

Notolabrus tetricussizes - Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 


Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 6.13. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at Cape 


100 

Notolabrus fucicola- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.14. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Cape 


75



60 

Notolabrus fucicloasizes - Cape Howe 

Abundance 

40 

20 


0 

60 

Abundance 

40 

20 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 

Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 6.15. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Cape Howe 


80 

Odax cyanomelas- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

60 

40 

20 

0 

80 

60 

40 

20 


Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.17. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Cape Howe 


76



35 

Odax cyanomelassizes - Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

28 

21 

14 

7 

0 

35 

28 

21 

14 

7 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 


Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 6.18. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Cape Howe 


30 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.19. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at 


77



Abundance 

Abundance 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Cheilodactylus spectabilissizes - Cape Howe 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 

Length (cm) 


Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 6.20. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at 


450 

Reef fish sizes - Cape Howe 

Abundance 

Abundance 

360 

270 

180 

90 

0 

450 

360 

270 

180 

90 

0 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 

Length (cm) 


Reference 

Survey 

2006 

2009 

Figure 6.21. Size density (number per 2000 m 2 ) of all fishes at Cape Howe Marine National Park and 


78



30 

Aplodactylus lophodon- Cape Howe 

Abundance 

20 

10 


0 

30 

Abundance 

20 

10 

Reference 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Year 

Figure 6.22. Site abundances (number per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus lophodon at 


79



a. Yellowtail mackerel Trachurus b. Eastern hula Trachinops taeniatus. 

novazelandiae. 

c. Sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii. d. Maori wrasse Ophthalmolepis lineolatus. 

e. Trevally Pseudocaranx georgianus. f. Urchin barren and red morwong 

Cheilodactylus fuscus. 

Figure 6.23. Site conditions and example photographs of typical fauna observed at Site 11, Gabo 

Island Harbour, 24 May 2009. 

80



a. Urchin barren, Sea urchin b. Mixed red and brown algae. 

Centrostephanus rodgersii. 

c. Soft coral Capnella gaboensis. d. Seastar Fromia polypora. 

Figure 6.24. Site conditions and example photographs of typical flora and fauna observed at Site 25, 

Gabo Island Northeast Gulch, 23 May 2009. 

81



7 REEF CONDITION INDICATORS 

7.1 Introduction 

The previous sections of this report provide a description of the monitoring data for each site 

over the monitoring period. It also identifies any important changes at the species and site 

scales. These data were combined in various ways to provide indicators of reef quality and 

changes at the marine protected area and regional spatial scales. Seven areas were 

assessed using the Twofold Shelf monitoring data: 

Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

Beware Reef reference areas 

Point Hicks Marine National Park 

Point Hicks reference areas 

Cape Howe Marine National Park 

Cape Howe reference areas 

Twofold Shelf bioregion (all sites) 

Reef quality indicators were developed to encompass key features of marine protected area 

performance assessment and general management concern. The indicators are grouped into 

the categories: biodiversity; ecosystem function; climate change; fishing and environment. 

The development of reef quality indicators using data from the standardised SRMP methods 

was initiated in Tasmania by the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute (Stuart- 

Smith et al. 2008). These indices were generally applicable for the Victorian SRMP, although 

some were adjusted to suit the circumstances. 

This chapter provides plots of means and standard errors for each of the univariate reef 

quality indicators and seven areas. This is to provide: 

An initial assessment of reef qualities with respect to marine protected areas and 

bioregions. 

An initial basis for the development of any formal indicator and reporting system of reef 

condition. 

7.2 Indicator Calculation Methods 

7.2.1 Biodiversity (B) 

B1 Community Change 

A multivariate index of community change is presently being developed. Various methods of 

indication and graphic representation of changes are being tested. The Tasmanian method is 

not used here as it does not translate well to multiple time series measurements and there is 

inconsistency with the dissimilarity indices used. Recently developed methods such as 

multivariate control charting and principal response curves are being examined for their 

suitability. 

B2 Species Richness and Diversity 

Species richness is given as the number of species observed at each site. Some species 

have been pooled within genera. The species richness indicator was given as the mean of 

species richness across all sites for each species group (fishes, invertebrates and algae). 

Cryptic fishes are included in fish species richness, despite being recorded on invertebrate 

transects. Pelagic, non-resident fishes and squids are excluded but octopuses are included. 

82



Species diversity was indicated using Hill’s N 2 . The mean was calculated for across sites for 

each species group (fishes, invertebrates and algae). Species diversity indices are generally 

more responsive, but also noisier, than species richness indices. 

Total individuals was calculated as the sum of the abundance of all species within each 

species group and averaged across sites. This index is used to show any simultaneous 

depression of abundances across all species. 

B3 Introduced Species 

Percentage introduced species of the total number of species at each site for each species 

group. The mean percentage is calculated using only those sites where at least one 

introduced species was found in at least one of the surveys. The index is calculated for fish 

and invertebrates combined. For algae, Undaria pinnatifida is not included in this indicator 

because cover measurements would not be representative due to the timing of surveys. It is 

included as a separate indicator, B5. 

B4 Introduced Individuals 

Percentage calculated similarly to B3 but expressed as the number of individuals for fish and 

invertebrates and as percentage cover for algae. 

B5 Occurrence of Undaria. 

Percentage of sites with Undaria pinnatifida known to be present. Presence absence may be 

determined from other sources of information where the monitoring sites are normally 

surveyed outside the growth period. This index is additional to the Tasmanian set. 

7.2.2 Ecosystem Function and Processes (EF) 

EF1 Habitat and Production. 

Biogenic habitat and standing stocks of primary producers was indicated by the average 

percent cover of the pooled seaweed groups: 

Canopy browns – defined here as Ecklonia radiata, Undaria pinnatifida, Lessonia 

corrugata, Macrocystis angustifolia, M. pyrifera, Durvillaea potatorum, Phyllospora 

comosa, Seirococcus axillaris, Acrocarpia paniculata, Cystophora platylobium, C. 

moniliformis, C. pectinata, C. monilifera, C. retorta and C. retroflexa 

Smaller browns (all other brown species except Ectocarpales) 

Reds (except filamentous species) 

Greens 

Erect coralline algae 

Other indicators of ecosystem functioning, including grazers, habitat modifiers, filer feeders, 

etc., are being developed. 

7.2.3 Climate Change (C) 

C1 Species from Adjacent Biogeographic Region – Proportion of Species 

For Twofold Shelf, this was calculated as the percentage of species at the site that are 

typically from the Peronian biogeographic province. 

This index differs from the Tasmanian index which has a focus on percentage of cold water 

species. In Victoria, there is expected to be an influx of species associated with 

strengthening of warmer current flows, such as the East Australia Current and the Leeuwin 

Current (which becomes the South Australia Current). For Twofold Shelf – the strongest 

83



indicator is likely to be from an influx of Peronian (NSW) province species. For other areas, 

the strongest indicator is likely to be a combination of: 

Influx of warmer water eastern and western species, particularly fishes. 

Change in range extents (e.g. many seaweeds have their eastern range at particular 

headlands across central Victoria). 

Proportion of cold water species. 

C2 Species from Adjacent Biogeographic Region – Proportion of Individuals 

For Twofold Shelf, this was calculated as the percentage of individuals at the site that are 

typically from the Peronian biogeographic province species. Variations on this index as are 

considered for C1 above. 

C3 Macrocystis 

The mean percent cover of string kelp Macrocystis spp. (using Methods 3 and 4) across 

sites. Method 3 data are used where Method 4 data are unavailable. 

C4 Centrostephanus 

The mean density of the long-spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii (using Method 2), 

across sites. 

C5 Durvillaea 

The mean percent cover of bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum (using Method 3), across sites. 

This index is additional to the Tasmanian set. Durvillaea potatorum is potentially two species 

– having genetically and morphologically distinct eastern and southern forms. The eastern 

form has reduced in range along the NSW coast by approximately 80 km. 

7.2.4 Fishing (F) 

F1 to F3 Abalone. 

The blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra was assessed for Twofold Shelf. The parameters 

assessed were: 

F1 - mean size. 

F2 - mean density of legal individuals, calculated as the proportion of legal sized 

individuals from the size measurements multiplied by the density estimate of abalone. 

F3 - the proportion of legal sized individual, expressed as a percentage of the number of 

individuals measured. 

The greenlip abalone Haliotis laevigata is also assessed for the Central Victoria bioregion. 

F4 to F6 Rock Lobster. 

The packhorse lobster Jasus verreauxi was assessed for Twofold Shelf. The parameters 

assessed were: 

F4 - mean size. 

F5 - mean density of legal individuals, calculated as the proportion of legal sized 

individuals from the size measurements multiplied by the density estimate. 

F6 - the proportion of legal sized individual, expressed as a percentage of the number of 

individuals measured. 

The southern rock lobster Jasus edwardsii is assessed for the other bioregions of Victoria. 

84



F7-F8 Size Spectra of Fishes 

The size spectrum of all fishes at a site is centred and linearised: 

Size frequencies for each field size class are aggregated into classes centred on 87.5 

mm (classes 1-6), 200 mm (class 7), 275 mm (classes 8-9), 356.25 mm (classes 10-11), 

400 mm (class 12), 500 mm (class 13), 625 mm (class 14), and 750 mm (class 15). 

Both frequencies (abundances) and size classes are logged (loge +1). 

The size classes are centred by subtracting the mean. 

Linear regression is used to estimate the slope and intercept (which is also the half-height of 

the slope). F4 is given as the mean slope across sites. F5 is given as the mean intercept 

across sites. 

This differs from the Tasmanian calculations which use logs to the base 10 and lengths are 

expressed in inches, to be consistent with SI units and conventional exponential curves. 

F9 Biomass of Large Fished Species 

Mean of the sum of biomass of selected species ≥ 300 mm. Biomass was calculated by 

converting lengths to weights using published conversion factors for the power relationship: 

weight(grams)=a*Length(cm)^b. The weight estimations used the coefficients compiled by 

Lyle and Campbell (1999). For Twofold Shelf, the selected species were the most common 

species under heaviest fishing pressure: 

Banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis (a = 0.0629, b = 2.881) 

Bastard trumpeter Latridopsis forsteri (a = 0.0487, b = 3.14) 

Blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus (a = 0.0539, b = 2.17) 

Purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola (a = 0.0539, b = 2.17) 

Crimson banded wrasse Notolabrus gymnogenis (a = 0.0539, b = 2.17) 

Eastern blue groper Achoerodus viridis (a = 0.0539, b = 2.17) 

This index differs from the Tasmanian F6 index in the type of species included and the 

addition of the 300 mm size class. 

F10 Proportion of Large Fished Individuals 

This is given by the number of large fished individuals (as listed for F6) ≥ 300 mm divided by 

the total number of fishes ≥ 300 mm. The mean proportion is then calculated across sites. 

This index differs from the Tasmanian index in that includes the 300 mm size class. 

F11-F12 Abundance and Size of Large Fished Fishes 

For each of the selected fish species (listed in F6), the indices are: (F8) mean of the number 

of individuals ≥ 300 mm; and (F9) mean of the mean size across sites. 

7.2.5 Environment (E) 

E1 Kelp Canopy to Green and Red Seaweed Dominance (CB to G&R). 

The relative proportion of cover of canopy brown (CB) seaweeds to red and green algae 

(G&R) cover. The index is scaled such that values from 50 to 100 indicate increasing 

dominance of canopy browns and values from 50 to 1 indicate an increasing dominance of 

G&R. The index is calculated by first truncating the data such that values < 1% cover are 

assigned a 1% cover. The index is then given by the proportion of CB cover over the sum of 

CB and G&R cover, expressed as a percentage, where either CB or G&R is > 1. 

85



This differs from the Tasmanian P1 index, which uses ratios that are asymmetric and difficult 

to plot and interpret. 

E2 Canopy Browns to Crustose Coralline Algae Dominance (CB to CCA) 

The relative proportion of cover of canopy brown (CB) seaweeds to crustose coralline algae 

(CCA) cover. The index is scaled such that values from 50 to 100 indicate increasing 

dominance of canopy browns and values from 50 to 1 indicate an increasing dominance of 

CCA. The index is calculated by first truncating the data such that values < 1% cover are 

assigned a 1% cover. The index is then given by the proportion of CB cover over the sum of 

CB and CCA cover, expressed as a percentage, where either CB or CCA is > 1. 

This differs from the Tasmanian P2 index, which uses ratios that are asymmetric and difficult 

to plot and interpret. 

E3 Sediment Cover 

Percentage cover of sand and sediment on the survey transect (Method 3). This differs from 

the P3 Tasmanian index in that this index does not differentiate between sand on reef or 

sand between reef. This would show any changes in sediment dynamics on the reef, which 

may or may not be human related. 

7.3 Indicator Results 

7.3.1 Indicator Plots and Legends 

The plots represent the mean of the indicator for each of the seven areas. Standard errors 

are presented for areas/surveys with more than two sites. The error bars are staggered 

between areas to prevent overlap. All plots have the same legend for each area – this is 

presented in Figure 7.1. 

It should be noted that there are some biases because of site changes during the program – 

this is particularly pertinent for the Cape Howe areas between Surveys 1 and 2 and between 

Surveys 3 and 4. Likely influences of these site changes are indicated in the text. 

7.3.2 Biodiversity (B) 

B1 Community Change. 

Indicators for community change, involving multivariate methods, are under development. 

B2 Species Richness and Diversity 

There was an apparent increase in fish species richness in the Cape Howe MNP between 

2006 and 2009 (Figure 7.2a). 

There was a general tendency for increased algal richness in most areas (Figure 7.2c). The 

recent, rapid increase of algal species richness at the Howe reference sites (Figure 7.2c) is 

because of the addition of two new reference sites during 2009. 

There was a marked increase in fish species diversity in the Cape Howe reference and MNP 

areas, between 2006 and 2009 (Figure 7.3a). 

There was a notable decreasing trend in invertebrate diversity between 2004 and 2009 

(Figure 7.3c). 

The recent, rapid increase of algal diversity at the Howe reference sites (Figure 7.3c) is 

because of the addition of two new reference sites during 2009. 

86



There was a notable increase in invertebrate total abundance in the Hicks reference area 

(Figure 7.4b). Changes in fish and algal total abundances at the Howe reference area are 

confounded by site changes during monitoring. 

B3 Introduced Species 

There were no introduced species observed during the Twofold Shelf surveys. 

B4 Introduced Individuals 

There were no introduced species observed during the Twofold Shelf surveys. 

B5 Occurrence of Undaria. 

Undaria pinnatifida is presently not known to occur in the Twofold Shelf region. 

87



All sites (whole bioregion) 

Beware Reef MS 

Beware Reef reference 


Point Hicks reference 

Cape Howe MNP 

Cape Howe reference 

Figure 7.1. Key to time series plots for Figures 7.2 to 7.19. 

Figure 7.2. Biodiversity condition indicators – species richness (B2): (a) fishes, including cryptic 

fishes; (b) mobile invertebrates; and (c) seaweeds. 

88



Figure 7.3. Biodiversity condition indicators – species diversity (B2): (a) fishes, including cryptic fishes; 

(b) mobile invertebrates; and (c) seaweeds. 

89



Figure 7.4. Biodiversity condition indicators – total abundance of individuals (B2): (a) fishes, number 

per 2000 m 2 ; (b) mobile invertebrates, number per 200 m 2 ; and (c) seaweeds, sum of percentage 

covers. 

90



7.3.3 Ecosystem Function and Processes (EF) 

EF1 Habitat and Production. 

The cover of canopy browns increased slightly at Beware Reef MS and the Beware 

reference site (Figure 7.5a), with a corresponding decrease in smaller browns (Figure 7.5b). 

There was an apparent increase in cover of canopy browns in the Hicks MNP and reference 

areas between 2001 and 2004 (Figure 7.5a), with a corresponding decrease in red 

seaweeds in the Hicks reference area (Figure 7.5c). 

There was a notable increase in green algal abundance in the Howe MNP and reference 

areas between 2006 and 2009 (Figure 7.5d). This increase may be exaggerated in the Howe 

reference area by the inclusion of the two new Gabo Island sites. 

Figure 7.5. Ecosystem function condition indicators – total abundance of individuals (EF1): (a) 

canopy-forming brown seaweeds, sum of percentage covers; (b) smaller brown seaweeds, sum of 

percentage covers; and (c) thallose red seaweeds, sum of percentage covers. 

91



Figure 7.5 (continued). Ecosystem function condition indicators – total abundance of individuals 

(EF1): (d) green seaweeds, sum of percentage covers; and (e) erect coralline seaweeds, sum of 

percentage covers. 

7.3.4 Climate Change (C) 

C1 Species from Adjacent Biogeographic Region – Proportion of Species 

There is a trend, since 2004, of increased proportion of Peronian fishes at all areas except 

the Beware reference site (Figure 7.6a). 

C2 Species from Adjacent Biogeographic Region – Proportion of Individuals 

There was a trend of increasing Peronian fish and invertebrate individuals at Cape Howe 

MNP (Figure 7.7a and 7.7b). 

C3 Macrocystis 

Macrocystis was present in Old Jetty Bay at Point Hicks MNP during 2001 and 2004, but has 

not been observed there since (Figure 7.8a). 

C4 Centrostephanus 

There were no obvious trends for Centrostephanus – the apparent decline in the Howe 

reference area to 2009 (Figure 7.8c) is a function of the monitoring site changes. 

C5 Durvillaea 

Durvillaea, where present, appeared to have a slight increasing trend in abundance (Figure 

7.8b). 

92



Figure 7.6. Climate condition indicators – proportion of Peronian biogeographic province species (C1): 

(a) fishes, percent; (b) invertebrates, percent; and (c) and seaweeds, percent. 

93



Figure 7.7. Climate condition indicators – proportion of Peronian biogeographic province individuals 

(C2): (a) fishes, percent; (b) invertebrates, percent; and (c) and seaweeds, percent. 

94



Figure 7.8. Climate condition indicators – abundance of selected species (C3): (a) string kelp 

Macrocystis angustifolia, percent cover; (b) bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum, percent cover; and (c) and 

long-spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii, number per 200 m 2 . 

7.3.5 Fishing (F) 

F1 to F3 Abalone. 

The mean size of abalone appears to have increased considerably in the Beware Reef MS 

and Point Hicks MNP areas between 2001 and 2004 (Figure 7.9a). 

The abundance of legal sized abalone appears to have increased in each of the Beware, 

Hicks and Howe marine protected areas since declaration (Figure 7.9b). 

The proportion of legal sized abalone appears to have increased at both Hicks MNP and 

reference areas, as well as the Howe MNP area, since declaration (Figure 7.9c). 

F4 to F6 Rock Lobster. 

The number of observations of rock lobster were too low to infer any trends. The data are 

presented here (Figure 7.10) to indicate the status of the data for future comparisons. 

F4-F5 Size Spectra of Fishes 

There were no clear trends in fish size spectra (Figure 7.11). 

95



F6 Biomass of Large Fished Species 

The biomass of large, fished fishes remained low at all areas (Figure 7.12a). 

F7 Proportion of Large Fished Individuals 

The proportion of large fishes, ≥ 300 mm, that were selected fished species appeared to 

increase at most areas between 2004 and 2009 (Figure 7.12b). 

F8-F9 Abundance and Size of Large Fished Fishes 

The densities of all selected larger fishes were generally low, making the indices ‘noisy’. 

The abundance of larger banded morwong C. spectabilis appeared to decrease between 

2004 and 2009 at Beware Reef MS, Hicks MNP and Hicks reference area (Figure 7.13). 

Abundances of bastard trumpeter L. forsteri were too low to interpret any trends (Figure 

7.14). 

There were variations in the density of larger blue throated wrasse N. tetricus over the survey 

period, with these trends being consistent between all areas (Figure 7.15). 

There was a notable decrease in the density of larger purple wrasse N. fucicola after 2004 


Abundances of crimson banded wrasse N. gymnogenis and blue groper A. viridis were too 

low to interpret any trends (Figures 7.17 and 7.18). 

96



Figure 7.9. Fishing condition indicators – blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra (F1-F3): (a) mean size, mm; 

(b) mean density of legal sized abalone, number per 200 m 2 ; and (c) mean abundance proportion of 

legal sized abalone. 

97



Figure 7.10. Fishing condition indicators – packhorse lobster Jasus verreauxi (F4-F6): (a) mean size, 

mm; (b) mean density of legal sized lobster, number per 200 m 2 ; and (c) mean abundance proportion 

of legal sized lobster. 

98



Figure 7.11. Fishing condition indicators – fish size spectra (F7-F8): (a) mean slope of spectra; and 

(b) mean half-height of spectra. 

Figure 7.12. Fishing condition indicators – large fish biomass and abundance (F9-F10): (a) mean 

biomass of selected species, individuals ≥ 300 mm; and (b) mean proportion of selected fished 

species individuals of all fishes ≥ 300 mm. 

99



Figure 7.13. Fishing condition indicators – banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis (F11): (a) 

mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and (b) mean size, mm. 

Figure 7.14. Fishing condition indicators – bastard trumpeter Latridopsis forsteri (F12): (a) mean 

densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and (b) mean size, mm. 

100



Figure 7.15. Fishing condition indicators – blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus (F13): (a) mean 


Figure 7.16. Fishing condition indicators – purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola (F14): (a) mean 


101



Figure 7.17. Fishing condition indicators – crimson banded wrasse Notolabrus gymnogenis (F15): (a) 

mean densities of individuals ≥ 300 mm, number per 2000 m 2 ; and (b) mean size, mm. 

Figure 7.18. Fishing condition indicators – eastern blue groper Achoerodus viridis (F16): (a) mean 


102



7.3.6 Environment (E) 

E1 Kelp Canopy to Green and Red Seaweed Dominance (CB to G&R). 

There was an apparent increase in dominance of canopy browns to green and red seaweeds 

at both Beware MS and Beware reference areas (Figure 7.19a). 

E2 Canopy Browns to Crustose Coralline Algae Dominance (CB to CCA) 

There were no obvious trends in the dominance of canopy browns to crustose coralline algae 

(Figure 7.19b). 

E3 Sediment Cover 

An increase in sand cover was evident in the Hicks MNP and Hicks reference areas and the 

Howe MNP area (Figure 7.19b). 

Figure 7.19. Environment condition indicators – dominance of selected components (E1-E3): (a) 

relative proportion of canopy browns (CB) and green and red seaweeds (GR); (b) relative proportion of 

canopy browns (CB) and crustose coralline algae (CCA); and (b) cover of sand. 

103



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This project was funded by Parks Victoria and supervised by Steffan Howe. We are grateful 

for the field assistance and technical support of Reinhart Strauss and crew from Wilderness 

Coast Charters. 

104



REFERENCES 

Clarke K., R. (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community 

structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18, 117-143. 

Dayton P. K., Tegner M. J., Edwards P. B. and Riser K. L. (1998) Sliding baselines, ghosts, 

and reduced expectations in kelp forest communities. Ecological Applications 8, 309-322. 

Ebeling A. W., Laur D. R. & Rowley R. J. (1985) Severe storm disturbances and reversal of 

community structure in a southern California kelp forest. Marine Biology 84, 287-294. 

Edgar G. J. (1998) Impact on and recovery of subtidal reefs. In: Iron Barron Oil Spill, July 

1995: Long Term Environmental Impact and Recovery. Tasmanian Department of Primary 

Industries and Environment, Hobart, 273-293. 

Edgar G. J. & Barrett N. S. (1997) Short term monitoring of biotic change in Tasmanian 

marine reserves. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 213, 261-279. 

Edgar G. J. & Barrett N. S. (1999) Effects of the declaration of marine reserves on 

Tasmanian reef fishes, invertebrates and plants. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and 

Ecology 242, 107-144. 

Edgar G. J., Moverly J., Barrett N. S., Peters D., & Reed C. (1997) The conservation-related 

benefits of a systematic marine biological sampling program: the Tasmanian reef 

bioregionalisation as a case study. Biological Conservation 79, 227-240. 

Edmunds M. & Hart S. (2003) Parks Victoria Standard Operating Procedure: Biological 

Monitoring of Subtidal Reefs. Parks Victoria Technical Series No. 9, Parks Victoria, 

Melbourne. 

Edmunds M., Roob R. & Ferns L. (2000) Marine Biogeography of the Central Victoria and 

Flinders Bioregions – a Preliminary Analysis of Reef Flora and Fauna. In: L. W. Ferns and D. 

Hough (eds). Environmental Inventory of Victoria’s Marine Ecosystems Stage 3 (Volume 2). 

Parks, Flora and Fauna Division, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, East 

Melbourne. Australia. 

Edmunds M., Roob R., & Ferns L. (2001) Biological Assessment of Proposals for Marine 

Protected Areas in the Twofold Shelf Bioregion. Report to Abalone Fishermens Cooperative 

Ltd. Australian Marine Ecology Report 122. Melbourne. 

Faith D., Minchin P. & Belbin L. (1987) Compositional dissimilarity as a robust measure of 

ecological distance. Vegetation 69, 57-68. 

Holling C. S. (1978) Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Wiley, 

Chichester. 

Kraft G. T. (2001) A Survey of Subtidal Marine Benthic Algae from the Point Hicks Region of 

East Gippsland. Report prepared for the Abalone Fishermens Cooperative Ltd, Mallacoota. 

School of Botany, University of Melbourne. 

Krebs C. J. (1999) Ecological Methodology, Second Edition. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo 

Park. 

Lyle J. M. & Campbell D. A. (1999). Species and Size Composition of Recreational Catches, 

with Particular Reference to Licensed Fishing Methods. Final Report to the Marine 

Recreational Fishery Advisory Committee. Tasmania Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, 

Hobart. 

Meredith C. (1997) Best Practice in Performance Reporting in Natural Resource 

Management. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne. 

105



Roob R., Edmunds M. & Ball D. (2000) Victorian Oil Spill Response Atlas: Biological 

resources. Macroalgal Communities in Central Victoria. Unpublished report to Australian 

Marine Safety Authority, Australian Marine Ecology Report No. 19, Melbourne. 

Stuart-Smith R., Barrett N., Crawford C., Edgar G. & Frusher S. (2008) Condition of Rocky 

Reef Communities: A Key Marine Habitat around Tasmania. NRM/NHT Final Report. 

Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, Hobart. 

Sweatman H., Cheal A., Coleman G., Fitzpatrick B., Miller I., Ninio R., Osborne K., Page C., 

Ryan D., Thompson A. & Tomkins P. (2000) Long-term Monitoring of the Great Barrier Reef. 

Status Report Number 4. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. 

Sweatman H., Abdo D., Burgess A., Cheal G., Coleman S., Delean S., Emslie M., Miller I., 

Osborne K., Oxley W., Page C. & Thompson A. (2003) Long-term Monitoring of the Great 

Barrier Reef. Status Report Number 6. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. 

106



APPENDIX 1 

A1. Site Details 

A1.1 Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary 

Beware Reef – Site 3223 

Site Description 

Beware Reef marine sanctuary is a small isolated reef located approximately 4 km offshore 

from Cape Conran. The reef profile in the shallower water consists of small gullies, slopes 

and flats down to the ten meter isobath, where the reef generally drops off steeply into 

deeper water. 

Transect Layout 

The Beware Reef monitoring site (Site 23) was positioned along the 8 m isobath over small 

gullies and flats. The central position is located on the eastern side of an emergent rock, with 

transects 1 and 2 along the northern side of the island and transects 3 and 4 along the 

southern side (forming a ‘v’). 

Latest Survey Notes 

Latest survey: 20 March 2009. Algal species richness had increased and invertebrate 

diversity decreased at Beware Reef MS between 2006 and 2009. 

Since 2006, the cover of bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum had increased by 16%. Abundance of 

the long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii had decreased slightly, however 

qualitative observations in deeper waters along the northern wall indicates densities in less 

exposed waters may have increased. The abundances of feather star Comanthus trichoptera 

and purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola increased markedly between 2006 and 2009. 

Figure A1.1. Site dive transects for Beware Reef (site 3223) in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary. 

A1.1



Table A1.1. Site details for Beware Reef (site 3223) in Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.820251 148.78686 55 657270 5812624 10 N MPA 

Pearl Point – Site 3224 


Pearl Point is a reference site for Beware Reef Marine Sanctuary. The habitat structure at 

Pearl Point was similar to Müller’s Reef and Petrel Point, consisting of ridges of reef 1-2 m 

high with gullies in between. 


The Pearl Point reference site is at 7-8 m depth. T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the 

northeast from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 20 March 2009. Algal species richness increased at Pearl Point. This site had 

a high density of feather star Comanthus trichoptera in 2004 and 2006; this had increased 

markedly in 2009. The abundances of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola also increased. 

Figure A1.2. Site dive transects for Pearl Point (site 3224), the reference site for Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary. 

Table A1.2. Site details for Pearl Point (site 3224), the reference site for Beware Reef Marine 

Sanctuary. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.794192 148.88321 55 665809 5815349 8 N Ref 

A1.2



A1.2 Point Hicks Marine National Park 

Old Jetty Bay – Site 3204 


Old Jetty Bay is located within the MNP, on the western side of Point Hicks, and is relatively 

sheltered and shallow. The substratum consists of flat rock slabs with low boulders and 

occasional bombies. Some areas of boulders and cobble were interspersed with sand. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the south from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a northerly 

direction, parallel to shore. 


Latest survey: 20 March 2009. There were considerable changes observed at Old Jetty Bay 

in 2009. There was a decrease in algal species diversity, with the boulder habitat more sand 

scoured and fewer thallose algae were present. The abundances of Ecklonia radiata and 

brown alga Acrocarpia paniculata had also decreased since 2006. Concurrent changes 

included increased abundances of the brown strap weed Cystophora moniliformis, red alga 

Rhodymenia linearis and crustose coralline algae. String kelp Macrocystis angustifolia has 

been absent at this site since the 2004 survey. There was high abundance of the seastar 

Meridiastra calcar. 

Figure A1.3. Site dive transects for Old Jetty Bay (site 3204) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

Table A1.3. Site details for Old Jetty Bay (site 3204) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.795762 149.26623 55 699533 5814426 4 N MPA 

A1.3



Hicks Southwest – Site 3221 


Hicks Southwest is highly exposed to swell and has both low and moderate relief reef (1- 

1.5 m), with steps, bombies and reef flats. There are patches of sand in the rock gullies and 

over rock flats. 


The areas of reef is short, so the transect curves to fit. T2 heads east from the marker, 

curving south in to T1. T3 heads west and T4 in a south-southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 19 March 2009. Ecklonia radiata had increased in abundance in 2009 and 

Rhodymenia linearis had maintained relatively high abundance at this site. There was a 

notable increase in Comanthus trichoptera abundance. Meridiastra calcar also occurred in 

relatively high densities. The abundance of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus and 

purple wrasse N. fucicola increased between 2006 and 2009. 

Figure A1.4. Site dive transects for Hicks Southwest (site 3221) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

Table A1.4. Site details for Hicks Southwest (site 3221) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.800317 149.26602 55 699502 5813921 8 N MPA 

A1.4



Hicks Joggle– Site 3222 


Hicks Joggle (Site 22) is situated beneath the lighthouse and is highly exposed, but has a 

small barrier reef in front of it which breaks up smaller swell waves. Larger waves continue 

over this reef and break on the steep shore. While the barrier reef protects the inner reef to 

some extent, a current frequently flows along the coast, between the barrier reef and the 

shore. This interacts with swells and backwash from the shore to make it a turbulent area 

(hence the name). The site is characterised by moderate to high granite boulders and 

outcrops (1.5-2 m) with low relief boulder habitat in the western end, where there are also 

large sand patches. 


The transect follows the curve of the bay. T2 and T1 head southeast from the marker, and T3 

and T4 curve from northwest at the marker to southwest at the end of T4. 


Latest survey: 19 March 2009. Crayweed Phyllospora comosa is the dominant canopy 

former at this site. The abundance of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra had increased between 

2006 and 2009. Densities of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus and purple wrasse N. 

fucicola remained relatively stable after declining between 2004 and 2006. 

Figure A1.5. Site dive transects for Hicks Joggle (site 3222) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

Table A1.5. Site details for Hicks Joggle (site 3222) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.803567 149.27414 55 700208 5813543 5 N MPA 

A1.5



Hicks Lighthouse – Site 3206 


Hicks Lighthouse (Site 6) is situated on the eastern side of the point and is fully exposed to 

easterly swells. Although the aspect of this site is sheltered from westerly swells, the waves 

refract around the point and break over the site. 


T2 and T1 head northeast from the marker, meandering parallel to the shoreline and offshore 

from a submerged bombie. T3 and T4 head in a southerly direction, also parallel to shore. 



former at this site. The seastar Meridiastra calcar occurred in relatively high densities. There 

was an increase in the abundance of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra between 2006 and 2009. 

Figure A1.6. Site dive transects for Hicks Lighthouse (site 3206) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

Table A1.6. Site details for Hicks Lighthouse (site 3206) in Point Hicks Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.802027 149.27735 55 700495 5813707 5 Y MPA 

A1.6



Krafts Garden – Site 3207 


Krafts Garden in a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National Park. Situated along a 

rocky reef outcrop immediately to the east of Point Hicks, Krafts Garden consists of gently 

sloping low-profile reef punctuated by bombies and outcrops 1-2 m high and interspersed 

with sandy patches. This site is particularly exposed to ground swell surge and sand 

continually being resuspended in the water column, reducing visibility. 


The marker is located within a sand patch. T2 and T1 head to the northeast from the marker, 

curving to the east on T1. T3 and T4 head in a southwest direction. 


Article I. Latest survey: 22 March 2009. There was an increase in the 

canopy coverage of Phyllospora comosa at this site, with corresponding 

declines in smaller thallose red algal abundances. Blacklip abalone Haliotis 

rubra increased in abundance. Abundances of N. tetricus were very low at 

Krafts Garden during the 2009 survey 

Figure A1.7. Site dive transects for Krafts Garden (site 3207), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine 

National Park. 

Table A1.7. Site details for Krafts Garden (site 3207), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.79748 149.28785 55 701432 5814189 5 N Ref 

A1.7



Durvillaea Flats – Site 3216 


Durvillaea Flats is a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National Park. The site is on rocky 

reef outcrop on the eastern side of Point Hicks. The gently sloping low-profile reef is 

punctuated by bombies and outcrops 1-2 m high and interspersed with sandy patches. There 

is strong ground swell surge at this site, with sand continually being resuspended in the 

water column, reducing visibility. 


The transects are situated on the inshore side of the reef following the shape of the reef 

outcrop. T2 heads north-northeast from the marker and then T1 curves to the west, and T3 

and T4 in a west-southwest direction. 



former. The bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum persisted in shallower, exposed areas of the reef. 

The abundance of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra increased slightly. 

Figure A1.8. Site dive transects for Durvillaea (site 3216), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine 


Table A1.8. Site details for Durvillaea (site 3216), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.795994 149.28778 55 701430 5814354 4 N Ref 

A1.8



Müller Reef – Site 3217 


Müller Reef is a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National Park. Müller Reef is rocky reef 

with 1-2 m high ridges with gullies in between. Some areas of low-profile reef were also 

observed. This site is prone to strong ground surge and high wave action. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the north-northeast from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

south-southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 22 March 2009. Ecklonia radiata was particularly abundant and was the 

dominant canopy former at this site. There were very high densities of feather star 

Comanthus trichoptera. 

Figure A1.9. Site dive transects for Müller Reef (site 3217), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine 


Table A1.9. Site details for Müller Reef (site 3217), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.78607 149.32244 55 704509 5815380 7 N Ref 

A1.9



Petrel Point – Site 3218 


Petrel Point is a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National Park. It is situated on rocky 

reef with 1-2 m high ridges with gullies in between. Some areas of low-profile reef were also 

observed. This site is prone to strong ground surge and high wave action. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the north-northeast from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

south-southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 22 March 2009. Ecklonia radiata was the dominant canopy former. This 

site had very high densities of feather star Comanthus trichoptera. There was a relatively 

large decline in the density of common sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma 

between 2006 and 2009 at Petrel Point. 

Figure A1.10. Site dive transects for Petrel Point (site 3218), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine 


Table A1.10. Site details for Petrel Point (site 3218), a reference site for Point Hicks Marine National 

Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.782085 149.38478 55 710011 5815684 8 N Ref 

A1.10



A1.3 Cape Howe Marine National Park 

Howe Perpendicular – Site 3220 


Howe Perpendicular was situated on low relief reef with 02.m to 0.5 m steps and ridges. 

There were areas of flat reef and sand patches. The transect ran perpendicular to shore, 

consequently depth ranged from 5 m at the near-shore end to 12 m at the offshore end of the 

transect. 


T2 heads in a straight line to the northwest from the marker, and T1 heads slightly west of 

north from the end of T2. T3 and T4 head in a southerly direction from the shot. 


This site was not surveyed in 2009. 

Figure A1.11. Site dive transects for Howe Perpendicular (site 3220) in Cape Howe Marine National 

Park. 

Table A1.11. Site details for Howe Perpendicular (site 3220) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.510074 149.97356 55 762829 5844386 10 N MPA 

A1.11



Howe Outer – Site 3227 


This site was a new site in 2009. Located within the Cape Howe Marine National Park, it is 

situated parallel to, and further offshore from, Howe Central (site 3214). These two sites are 

approximately 75 m apart. This new site was considerably deeper (10-12 m). 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the northeast from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 5 May 2009. This site had patches of Phyllospora comosa interspersed with 

thallose red algae and sand. Crustose coralline algae was abundant. Macroinvertebrate 

abundance was low, with the exceptions of moderate densities of urchins Centrostephanus 

rodgersii and Blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra, which were abundant on T3 and T4. Fish 

species diversity and richness was high. 

Table A1.12. Site details for Howe Outer (site 3227) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.50853 149.976.10 55 763059 5844551 14 N MPA 

A1.12



Howe West – Site 3213 


Howe West was on moderate relief reef with gullies and depressions. Dense beds of 

Phyllospora comosa were present on reef tops and there were patches of urchin barren. 





Latest survey: 18 March 2009. There was persistently high abundance of crayweed 

Phyllospora comosa. There is considerable shading beneath the canopy of these stands, 

which have a high cover of sessile invertebrates on the reef. This site had high fish species 

diversity. 

Figure A1.12. Site dive transects for Howe West (site 3213) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

Table A1.13. Site details for Howe West (3213) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.509868 149.97349 55 762823 5844409 7 Y MPA 

A1.13



Howe Central – Site 3214 


Howe central was on low to moderate relief reef with some gullies and ridges. Dense beds of 

Phyllospora comosa were present on reef tops and there were several areas of urchin 

barren. 





Latest survey: 18 March 2009. There were persistently high covers of crayweed Phyllospora 

comosa. Blacklip abalone H. rubra abundances increased at the Howe Central site between 

2006 and 2009. Centrostephanus rodgersii abundances at Howe Central in 2009 were triple 

those observed previously. Relatively high densities of eastern blue groper Achoerodus 

viridis were observed at Howe Central in 2009. Most of these fishes were small (< 300 mm). 

A high number of juvenile banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis observed at Howe 

Central in 2009. 

Figure A1.13. Site dive transects for Howe Central (site 3214) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

Table A1.14. Site details for Howe Central (3214) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.507847 149.97609 55 763060 5844626 8 Y MPA 

A1.14



Howe Border – Site 3215 


There was moderate relief reef, with some larger bombies, holes and drop-offs present at 

Howe Border. This site initially had a high cover of crayweed Phyllospora comosa, but in 

recent surveys the area and number of urchin barren patches has increased. 





Latest survey: 18 March 2009. There were considerable changes at the Howe Border site. 

There was a marked decline in P. comosa cover, reducing from 70% cover in 2001 to 29% 

cover in 2009. Blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra decreased in density. Long-spined urchin 

Centrostephanus rodgersii density was particularly high at Howe Border, with 265-437 per 

200 m 2 . White-ear Parma microlepis and the one-spot puller Chromis hypsilepis were both 

abundant in urchin barren patches. 

Figure A1.14. Site dive transects for Howe Border (site 3215) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

Table A1.15. Site details for Howe Border (site 3215) in Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.507127 149.97857 55 763282 5844699 10 Y MPA 

A1.15



Tullaberga Deep – Site 3208 


This site was 5-7 m deep and was characterised by moderate to high relief bedrock outcrops 

at the southern end, with lower relief rock slabs at the northern end. There were occasional 

patches of boulders and rubble, providing interstitial spaces. Much of the Tullaberga site was 

sea urchin barren habitat with high abundances of Centrostephanus rodgersii and encrusting 

coralline algae. Crayweed Phyllospora comosa was present on occasional boulder tops. 

A predominant feature was the high abundance of white ear damselfish Parma microlepis 

and one spot puller Chromis hypsilepis. 


T2 and T1 head south from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a northerly direction. 


This site was not surveyed in 2009 

Table A1.16. Site details for Tullaberga Deep (site 3208), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.557676 149.84232 55 751066 5839462 7 N Ref 

A1.16



Gabo Monument – Site 3210 


Gabo Monument site (near the pump house) was all sea urchin barren on a substratum of 

large granite boulders with a large amount of interstitial space. Small Phyllospora comosa 

clumps were present on the tops of occasional large boulders. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the south-southwest from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

northwest direction. 


This site was not surveyed in 2009 

Figure A1.15. Site dive transects for Gabo Monument (site 3210), a reference site for Cape Howe 


Table A1.17. Site details for Gabo Monument (site 3210), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.564001 149.90485 55 756569 5838591 6 N Ref 

A1.17



Gabo Harbour – Site 3211 


A non-SRMP site, Site 11 Gabo Harbour, was resurveyed opportunistically during the 2009 

survey, being previously surveyed in 2001. This site was shallow and protected from swell. It 

was all urchin barren on granite boulder reef. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the south-southwest from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

northwest direction. 


Latest survey: 24 March 2009. Macroalgae cover was very low, as the site was 

predominantly urchin barren. Long spined urchins Centrostephanus rodgersii was the most 

abundant macroinvertebrate. Some pencil urchins Phyllacanthus parvispinus were also 

present. White ear damselfish Parma microlepis eastern hulafish Trachinops taeniatus and 

one spot puller Chromis hypsilepis were all abundant. Eastern blue groper Achoerodus viridis 

were also relatively abundant at the Gabo Harbour site. 

Figure A1.16. Site dive transects for Gabo Harbour (site 3211), a reference site for Cape Howe 


Table A1.18. Site details for Gabo Harbour (site 3211), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.5556 149.9076 55 756844 5839511 5 N Ref 

A1.18



Gabo NE Gulch – Site 3225 


This site was a new site in 2009 and is a reference site for Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

It is located on the eastern side of Gabo Island. 

The substratum at is site consisted of a steep drop-off from the shore to 7 m depth with 

boulder fields, rocky outcrops and steps at the base. At the end of transect 4 there were 

patches of urchin barren. 


The transect ran parallel to shore. T2 and T1 headed in a straight line to the northwest from 

the marker, and T3 and T4 in a southeast direction, finishing just past a steep dropoff. 


Latest survey: 23 March 2009. The site is dominated by a mixture of Phyllospora comosa, 

Acrocarpia paniculata, smaller brown algae such as Halopteris and Zonaria spp., erect 

coralline algae and crustose coralline algae. This site has a high density of Centrostephanus 

rodgersii, particularly at the T4 end of the transect. Fish species richness was high and there 

were relatively high abundances of wrasses, including senator wrasse Pictalabrus laticlavius. 

Table A1.19. Site details for Gabo NE Gulch (site 3225), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.5532 149.912 55 757234 5839776 7 N Ref 

A1.19



Gabo Boulder Bay – Site 3226 


This site was a new site in 2009 and is a reference site for Cape Howe Marine National Park. 

It is located on the eastern side of Gabo Island. 

Similar to Gabo NE Gulch (site 3225), it is dominated by a mixture of Phyllospora comosa, 

Acrocarpia paniculata, smaller brown algae, erect coralline algae and crustose coralline 

algae. The substratum consisted of steep dropoffs from the shore with boulder fields and 

rocky outcrops. 


T2 and T1 curved parallel to shore, from north at the marker to northwest at the end of T1. 

and T3 and T4 headed in a southerly direction. 


Latest survey 24 March 2009. Similar to Gabo NE Gulch (site 3225), it is dominated by a 

mixture of Phyllospora comosa, Acrocarpia paniculata, smaller brown algae, erect coralline 

algae and crustose coralline algae. Blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra were relatively abundant, 

as were banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis. 

Table A1.20. Site details for Gabo Boulder Bay (site 3226), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.564 149.9179 55 757722 5838557 9 N Ref 

A1.20



Iron Prince West – Site 3212 




sites are dominated by a tall canopy of Phyllospora comosa. 


T2 heads east from the marker, with T1 curving northeast from the end of T2. T3 and T4 

head in a southwest direction. 


Latest survey: 23 March 2009. This site had a canopy of Phyllosora comosa. There was an 

increase in invertebrate diversity at Iron Prince West between 2006 and 2009. The trumpet 

shell Cabestana spengleri decreased in abundance. Red bait crabs Plagusia chabrus were 

persistently higher abundances of at Iron Prince West compared with other sites. 

Figure A1.21. Site dive transects for Iron Prince West (site 3212), a reference site for Cape Howe 


Table A1.21. Site details for Iron Prince West (site 3212), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.519333 149.96295 55 761858 5843388 5 Y Ref 

A1.21



Prince Wreck – Site 3219 




sites are dominated by a tall canopy of Phyllospora comosa. 


T2 and T1 head in a straight line to the northwest from the marker, and T3 and T4 in a 

southeast direction. 


Latest survey: 23 March 2009. This site had a tall canopy of crayweed Phyllospora comosa. 

There was a decrease in the abundance of trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri, and 

persistent moderately high abundances of dogwhelk Dicathais orbita at Iron Prince Wreck. 

This site had high fish abundance and richness. Purple wrasse N. fucicola had increased in 

abundance and herring cale Odax cyanomelas have been persistently high. Stripey mado 

Atypichthys strigatus are also relatively very abundant. 

Figure A1.22. Site dive transects for Prince Wreck (site 3219), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine 


Table A1.22. Site details for Prince Wreck (site 3219), a reference site for Cape Howe Marine National 

Park. 

GDA 

latitude 

GDA 

longitude 

Zone 

MGA 

Easting 

MGA 

Northing 

Depth 

(m) 

Ab100 MPA/Ref 

-37.52067 149.96428 55 761971 5843236 6 N Ref 

A1.22



APPENDIX 2 

A2. Site Data 

A2.1 Regional Community Analysis 

Macroalgae 

Species Richness 

30 

20 

10 

3223 

Algae Species Richness 

a. Beware MS 

0 


30 

20 

10 

3224 

b. Beware Refs 

0 


30 

20 

10 

3204 

30 

20 

10 

3221 

30 

20 

10 

3222 

30 

20 

10 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


30 

20 

10 

3207 

30 

20 

10 

3216 

30 

20 

10 

3217 

30 

20 

10 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

0 

0 

0 

0 


30 

20 

10 

3227 

30 

20 

10 

3213 

30 

20 

10 

3214 

30 

20 

10 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


30 

20 

10 

3225 

30 

20 

10 

3226 

30 

20 

10 

3212 

30 

20 

10 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.1. Seaweed species richness index for monitoring sites in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion. 

A2.1



10 

8 

3223 

Algae Species Diversity 

a. Beware MS 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

3224 


Hills N2 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

3204 

10 

8 

3221 

10 

8 

3222 

10 

8 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3207 

10 

8 

3216 

10 

8 

3217 

10 

8 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3227 

10 

8 

3213 

10 

8 

3214 

10 

8 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3225 

10 

8 

3226 

10 

8 

3212 

10 

8 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.2. Seaweed species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for monitoring sites in the 

Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

A2.2



Invertebrates 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3223 

Invertebrate Species Richness 

a. Beware MS 

0 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3224 


0 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3204 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3221 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3222 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3207 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3216 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3217 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

0 

0 

0 

0 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3227 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3213 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3214 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


20 

15 

10 

5 

3225 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3226 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3212 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.3. Invertebrate species richness index for monitoring sites in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion. 

A2.3



8 

6 

3223 

Invertebrate Species Diversity 

a. Beware MS 

Hills N2 

4 

2 

0 

8 

6 

3224 


Hills N2 

4 

2 

0 

8 

6 

3204 

8 

6 

3221 

8 

6 

3222 

8 

6 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

Hills N2 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8 

6 

3207 

8 

6 

3216 

8 

6 

3217 

8 

6 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

Hills N2 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8 

6 

3227 

8 

6 

3213 

8 

6 

3214 

8 

6 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

Hills N2 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8 

6 

3225 

8 

6 

3226 

8 

6 

3212 

8 

6 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

Hills N2 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.4. Invertebrate species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for monitoring sites in the 

Twofold Shelf bioregion. 

A2.4



Fish 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3223 

Fish Species Richness 

a. Beware MS 

0 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3224 


0 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3204 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3221 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3222 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3207 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3216 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3217 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

0 

0 

0 

0 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3227 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3213 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3214 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 


25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3225 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3226 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3212 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.5. Fish species richness index for monitoring sites in the Twofold Shelf 

bioregion. 

A2.5



10 

8 

3223 

Fish Species Diversity 

a. Beware MS 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

3224 


Hills N2 

6 

4 

2 

0 

10 

8 

3204 

10 

8 

3221 

10 

8 

3222 

10 

8 

3206 

c. Hicks MNP 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3207 

10 

8 

3216 

10 

8 

3217 

10 

8 

3218 

d. Hicks Refs 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3227 

10 

8 

3213 

10 

8 

3214 

10 

8 

3215 

e. Howe MNP 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

10 

8 

3225 

10 

8 

3226 

10 

8 

3212 

10 

8 

3219 

f. Howe Refs 

Hills N2 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

6 

4 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.6. Fish species diversity index (Hill’s N 2 ) for monitoring sites in the Twofold 

Shelf bioregion. 

A2.6



A2.2 Point Hicks Marine National Park 

Macroalgae 

Phyllospora comosa 

Percent Cover 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3204 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3221 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3222 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3206 

a. MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Percent Cover 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3207 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3216 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3217 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3218 

b. Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.7 Site abundances (percent cover) of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and reference sites. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; (3222) Hicks 

Joggle; (3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts Garden; (3216) Durvillaea Flats; (3217) Muller Reef; 

and (3218) Petrel Point. 

Ecklonia radiata 

Percent Cover 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3204 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3221 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3222 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3206 

a. MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Percent Cover 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3207 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3216 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3217 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3218 

b. Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.8 Site abundances (percent cover) of common kelp Ecklonia at Point Hicks Marine National 

Park and reference sites. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; (3222) Hicks Joggle; 

(3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts Garden; (3216) Durvillaea Flats; (3217) Muller Reef; and 

(3218) Petrel Point. 

A2.7



Cystophora moniliformis 

15 

3204 

15 

3221 

15 

3222 

15 

3206 

a. MNP 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

15 

3207 

15 

3216 

15 

3217 

15 

3218 

b. Refs 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.9. Site abundances (percent cover) of brown strapweed Cystophora moniliformis at Point 

Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; 

(3222) Hicks Joggle; (3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts Garden; (3216) Durvillaea Flats; (3217) 

Muller Reef; and (3218) Petrel Point. 

Rhodymenia linearis 

15 

3204 

15 

3221 

15 

3222 

15 

3206 

a. MNP 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

15 

3207 

15 

3216 

15 

3217 

15 

3218 

b. Refs 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.10. Site abundances (percent cover) of red understorey alga Rhodymenia linearis at Point 

Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; 



A2.8



Crustose Coralline Algae 

15 

3204 

15 

3221 

15 

3222 

15 

3206 

a. MNP 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

15 

3207 

15 

3216 

15 

3217 

15 

3218 

b. Refs 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.11. Site abundances (percent cover) of crustose coralline algae at Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and reference sites Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; (3222) Hicks 



M. angustifolia 

A. paniculata 

D. potatorum 

10 

3204 

5 

3204 

5 

3216 

Percent Cover 

8 

6 

4 

2 

4 

3 

2 

1 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.12. Abundances (percent cover) of seaweeds of interest at predominant sites at Point Hicks 

Marine National Park and reference sites: string kelp Macrocystis angustifolia; wiry brown weed 

Acrocarpia paniculata; and bull kelp Durvillaea potatorum. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; and (3216) 

Durvillaea Flats. 

A2.9



Invertebrates 

Comanthus trichoptera 

250 

200 

3204 

250 

200 

3221 

250 

200 

3222 

250 

200 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

150 

100 

150 

100 

150 

100 

150 

100 

50 

50 

50 

50 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Density 

250 

200 

150 

100 

3207 

250 

200 

150 

100 

3216 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

3217 

2000 

1500 

1000 

3218 

b. Refs 

50 

50 

1000 

500 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.13. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the feather star Comanthus trichoptera at Point Hicks 

Marine National Park and reference sites. Note scale changes for Sites 17 and 18. Sites: (3204) Old 

Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; (3222) Hicks Joggle; (3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts 

Garden; (3216) Durvillaea Flats; (3217) Muller Reef; and (3218) Petrel Point. 

Meridiastra calcar 

2600 

1950 

3204 

2600 

1950 

3221 

2600 

1950 

3222 

2600 

1950 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

1300 

1300 

1300 

1300 

650 

650 

650 

650 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2600 

1950 

3207 

2600 

1950 

3216 

2600 

1950 

3217 

2600 

1950 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

1300 

1300 

1300 

1300 

650 

650 

650 

650 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.14. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the seastar Meridiastra calcar at Point Hicks Marine 




A2.10



Cabestana spengleri 

220 

165 

3204 

220 

165 

3221 

220 

165 

3222 

220 

165 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

110 

110 

110 

110 

55 

55 

55 

55 

0 

0 

0 

0 

220 

165 

3207 

220 

165 

3216 

220 

165 

3217 

220 

165 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

110 

110 

110 

110 

55 

55 

55 

55 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.15. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the trumpet shell Cabestana at Point Hicks Marine 




Haliotis rubra 

120 

3204 

120 

3221 

120 

3222 

120 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

0 

0 

0 

120 

3207 

120 

3216 

120 

3217 

120 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.16. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Point Hicks Marine 




A2.11



Sizes 


Length (mm) 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

3204 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

3221 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

3222 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

3206 

a. MNP 

Length (mm) 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

180 

3207 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

180 

3216 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

180 

3217 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

180 

3218 

160 

140 

120 

100 

b. Refs 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

80 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.17. Median sizes (mm ± 25%iles) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Point Hicks Marine 




Heliocidaris erythrogramma 

120 

3204 

120 

3221 

120 

3222 

120 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

0 

0 

0 

120 

3207 

120 

3216 

120 

3217 

120 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.18. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the common sea urchin Heliocidaris at Point Hicks 

Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3221) Hicks Southwest; (3222) 

Hicks Joggle; (3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts Garden; (3216) Durvillaea Flats; (3217) Muller 

Reef; and (3218) Petrel Point. 

A2.12



Plagusia chabrus 

30 

3204 

30 

3221 

30 

3222 

30 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

30 

3207 

30 

3216 

30 

3217 

30 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.19. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the red bait crab Plagusia chabrus at Point Hicks 




Centrostephanus rodgersii 

100 

3222 

100 

3206 

100 

3217 

100 

3218 

80 

80 

80 

80 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Figure A2.20. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii 

at Point Hicks Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites: (3222) Hicks Joggle; (3206) Hicks 

Lighthouse; (3217) Muller Reef; and (3218) Petrel Point. 

Turbo undulatus 

40 

3204 

40 

3206 

40 

3207 

40 

3216 

30 

30 

30 

30 

Density 

20 

20 

20 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Figure A2.21. Site abundances (per 200 m 2 ) of the turban shell Turbo undulatus at Point Hicks Marine 

National Park and reference sites. Sites: (3204) Old Jetty Bay; (3206) Hicks Lighthouse; (3207) Krafts 

Garden; and (3216) Durvillaea Flats. 

A2.13



Fish 

Notolabrus tetricus 

50 

40 

3204 

50 

40 

3221 

50 

40 

3222 

50 

40 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

50 

40 

3207 

50 

40 

3216 

50 

40 

3217 

50 

40 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.22. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at Point 




Notolabrus fucicola 

120 

3204 

120 

3221 

120 

3222 

120 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

0 

0 

0 

120 

3207 

120 

3216 

120 

3217 

120 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

80 

40 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.23. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Point Hicks 




A2.14



Odax cyanomelas 

30 

3204 

30 

3221 

30 

3222 

30 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

30 

3207 

30 

3216 

30 

3217 

30 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.24. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Point Hicks Marine 




Cheilodactylus spectabilis 

40 

30 

3204 

40 

30 

3221 

40 

30 

3222 

40 

30 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

20 

20 

20 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

40 

30 

3207 

40 

30 

3216 

40 

30 

3217 

40 

30 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

20 

20 

20 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.25. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Point 




A2.15



Aplodactylus lophodon 

25 

20 

3204 

25 

20 

3221 

25 

20 

3222 

25 

20 

3206 

a. MNP 

Density 

15 

10 

15 

10 

15 

10 

15 

10 

5 

5 

5 

5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

25 

20 

3207 

25 

20 

3216 

25 

20 

3217 

25 

20 

3218 

b. Refs 

Density 

15 

10 

15 

10 

15 

10 

15 

10 

5 

5 

5 

5 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.26. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus lophodon at Point 




A2.16



A2.3 Cape Howe Marine National Park 

Macroalgae 

Phyllospora comosa 

Percent Cover 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3227 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3213 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3214 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3215 

a. MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Percent Cover 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3225 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3226 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3212 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

3219 

b. Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.27. Percent cover of crayweed Phyllospora comosa at Cape Howe Marine National 

Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe Central 

(3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West 

(3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Crustose Coralline Algae 

Percent Cover 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3227 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3213 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3214 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3215 

a. MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Percent Cover 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3225 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3226 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3212 

40 

30 

20 

10 

3219 

b. Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.28. Percent cover of crustose coralline algae at Cape Howe Marine National Park 

and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe Central (3214), 

Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West (3212) 

and Prince Wreck (3219). 

A2.17



Halopteris 

Percent Cover 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3227 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3213 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3214 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3215 

a. MNP 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Percent Cover 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3225 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3226 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3212 

20 

15 

10 

5 

3219 

b. Refs 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.29. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine 

National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe 

Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince 

West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Haliptilon roseum 

15 

3227 

15 

3213 

15 

3214 

15 

3215 

a. MNP 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

0 

0 

0 

15 

3225 

15 

3226 

15 

3212 

15 

3219 

b. Refs 

Percent Cover 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

10 

5 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.30. Percent cover of small brown algae Halopteris spp. at Cape Howe Marine 

National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe 

Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince 


A2.18



Invertebrates 

Centrostephanus rodgersii 

450 

360 

3227 

450 

360 

3213 

450 

360 

3214 

450 

360 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

270 

180 

270 

180 

270 

180 

270 

180 

90 

90 

90 

90 

0 

0 

0 

0 

450 

360 

3225 

450 

360 

3226 

450 

360 

3212 

450 

360 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

270 

180 

270 

180 

270 

180 

270 

180 

90 

90 

90 

90 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.31. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of long spined sea urchin Centrostephanus 

rodgersii in the vicinity of Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe 

Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch 

(3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Turbo undulatus 

400 

300 

3227 

400 

300 

3213 

400 

300 

3214 

400 

300 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

200 

200 

200 

200 

100 

100 

100 

100 

0 

0 

0 

0 

400 

300 

3225 

400 

300 

3226 

400 

300 

3212 

400 

300 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

200 

200 

200 

200 

100 

100 

100 

100 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.32. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of turban shell Turbo undulatus at Cape 

Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West 

(3213), Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay 

(3226), Iron Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

A2.19




200 

150 

3227 

200 

150 

3213 

200 

150 

3214 

200 

150 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

100 

100 

100 

100 

50 

50 

50 

50 

0 

0 

0 

0 

200 

150 

3225 

200 

150 

3226 

200 

150 

3212 

200 

150 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

100 

100 

100 

100 

50 

50 

50 

50 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.33. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Cape 

Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West 

(3213), Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay 

(3226), Iron Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Sizes 


Length (mm) 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

3220 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

3213 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

3214 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

3215 

a. MNP 

Length (mm) 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

160 

3225 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

160 

3226 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

160 

3212 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

160 

3219 

140 

120 

100 

80 

b. Refs 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

60 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.34 Median sizes (mm ± 25%iles) of blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra at Cape Howe 

Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), 

Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron 

Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

A2.20



Heliocidaris erythrogramma 

100 

80 

3227 

100 

80 

3213 

100 

80 

3214 

100 

80 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

0 

0 

0 

100 

80 

3225 

100 

80 

3226 

100 

80 

3212 

100 

80 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.35. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of common sea urchin Heliocidaris 

erythrogramma at Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe 

Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch 

(3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Cabestana spengleri 

50 

40 

3227 

50 

40 

3213 

50 

40 

3214 

50 

40 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

50 

40 

3225 

50 

40 

3226 

50 

40 

3212 

50 

40 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

30 

20 

10 

10 

10 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.36. Abundance (individuals per 200 m 2 ) of trumpet shell Cabestana spengleri at 

Cape Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe 

West (3213), Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder 

Bay (3226), Iron Prince West (3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

A2.21



Fish 

Notolabrus tetricus 

100 

80 

3227 

100 

80 

3213 

100 

80 

3214 

100 

80 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

0 

0 

0 

100 

80 

3225 

100 

80 

3226 

100 

80 

3212 

100 

80 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.37. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of blue throated wrasse Notolabrus tetricus at Cape 

Howe Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), 

Howe Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince 


Notolabrus fucicola 

100 

80 

3227 

100 

80 

3213 

100 

80 

3214 

100 

80 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

0 

0 

0 

100 

80 

3225 

100 

80 

3226 

100 

80 

3212 

100 

80 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

60 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.38. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of purple wrasse Notolabrus fucicola at Cape Howe 

Marine National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe 

Central (3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West 

(3212) and Prince Wreck (3219). 

A2.22



Odax cyanomelas 

80 

60 

3227 

80 

60 

3213 

80 

60 

3214 

80 

60 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

40 

40 

40 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

0 

0 

0 

80 

60 

3225 

80 

60 

3226 

80 

60 

3212 

80 

60 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

40 

40 

40 

40 

20 

20 

20 

20 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.40. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of herring cale Odax cyanomelas at Cape Howe Marine 

National Park and reference sites. Sites are Howe Offshore (3227), Howe West (3213), Howe Central 

(3214), Howe Border (3215), Gabo Gulch (3225), Gabo Boulder Bay (3226), Iron Prince West (3212) 

and Prince Wreck (3219). 

Cheilodactylus spectabilis 

30 

3227 

30 

3213 

30 

3214 

30 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

30 

3225 

30 

3226 

30 

3212 

30 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.41. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of banded morwong Cheilodactylus spectabilis at Cape 




A2.23



Aplodactylus lophodon 

30 

3227 

30 

3213 

30 

3214 

30 

3215 

a. MNP 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

0 

0 

0 

30 

3225 

30 

3226 

30 

3212 

30 

3219 

b. Refs 

Density 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

20 

10 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

0 

2001 2004 2007 2010 

Year 

Figure A2.42. Site abundances (per 2000 m 2 ) of eastern kelpfish Aplodactylus lophodon at Cape 




A2.24

Parks Victoria is responsible for managing the Victorian protected 

area network, which ranges from wilderness areas to metropolitan 

parks and includes both marine and terrestrial components. 

Our role is to protect the natural and cultural values of the parks 

and other assets we manage, while providing a great range of 

outdoor opportunities for all Victorians and visitors. 

A broad range of environmental research and monitoring activities 

supported by Parks Victoria provides information to enhance park 

management decisions. This Technical Series highlights some of 

the environmental research and monitoring activities done within 

Victoria’s protected area network. 

Healthy Parks Healthy People 

For more information contact the Parks Victoria Information Centre 

on 13 1963, or visit www.parkweb.vic.gov.au

Victorian Subtidal Reef Monitoring Program - Parks Victoria

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?