Pressures

Estuarine realm

Lara van Niekerk1, 2 , Susan Taljaard1, 2 , Janine B. Adams3, 2 , Stephen J. Lamberth4, 2 , Fiona C. Mackay5, 6 , Steven P. Weerts1, 7 , Daniel A. Lemley2 , Nicola C. James8, 2 , Chuene P. Lakane2, 3

1. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research

2. Institute for Coastal and Marine Research, Nelson Mandela University

3. DST/NRF Research Chair in Shallow Water Ecosystems, Nelson Mandela University

4. Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries

5. Oceanographic Research Institute, SAAMBR

6. University of KwaZulu-Natal

7. University of Zululand

8. South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity

Published

November 11, 2025

Overall 30% estuaries are under high or very high cumulative pressure from flow reduction, pollution, overfishing, biological invasive and artificial breaching.

Overall multiple interventions are required to avoid further decline in health. These include protection of freshwater inflow to estuaries and the sea, restoration of water quality, reduction in fishing effort and avoidance of mining, infrastructure development and crops in the estuarine functional zone.

Heavily degraded Swartkops Estuary under pressure from pollution, over fishing, coastal development and biological invations (Source - Riaan Weitz)

Pressure overviews

Estuarine ecosystems and species face ever increasing pressures from range and intensity of human activities which continue to expand and diversity along the coast. The 2025 pressure evaluation shows that a third of freshwater flow no longer reaches the coast (22% of systems severely impacted). Wastewater discharges amount to about 655 000 m3/d (32% of estuaries under severe pollution pressure), with harmful algal blooms (HABs) now recorded in 18% of estuaries in response to declining water quality. Over 22% of estuaries are also subjected to severe habitat modification.

Estuaries, especially in KwaZulu-Natal and Wild Coast, are under extreme pressure from illegal gillnetting, with systems under severe pressure increasing from 15% to 21% to 28% between 2011, 2018 and 2025 (75%, 78% and 85% of area), significantly compromising the multiple benefits derived from estuaries. The mouths of only 15% of South African estuary are artificially manipulated, but these estuaries represent more than 60% of the total estuarine habitat in the country. Alien, extralimital or translocated fish occur in 25 % of South Africa’s estuaries. There are 22 species recorded to date with one to nine per system. A third of estuaries have invasive terrestrial plants occurring within the estuarine functional zone whilst aquatic invasive species heavily infest 8% of estuaries.

Understading key estuary pressure

A brief summary of pressures is provided here with a description of each pressure, detailed the relative intensity of each pressure, summarised patterns in the extent and intensity of pressures, summarise biodiversity impacts of each pressure, and noting mitigation measures (1,2).

Key pressure categories include (2):

  • Freshwater flow modification impacts estuarine productivity and ecological functioning, affecting estuarine circulation and retention. It also impacts water chemistry (e.g., salinity, dissolved oxygen), sediment processes, and land-sea connectivity. In extreme cases, it can lead to type changes, causing closure of estuaries previously categorised as permanently open (3). Associated biological impacts include degradation of habitats such as intertidal mudflats, salt marsh, and mangroves. Changes in connectivity can impact life-cycle requirements of migrating species, and genetic exchange between estuaries and adjacent marine environment.

  • Land-use and development refer to land-use such as agriculture, as well as hard infrastructure development such as harbours and ports. Direct effects include loss of abiotic and biotic habitat, changes in circulation patterns, disruption of erosion/depositional cycles, modified tidal regimes, premature mouth closure, water clarity, and declining primary productivity. Ultimately, habitat changes have cascading impacts on biota, affecting population size/biomass, community composition, and possible local extinctions. Habitat loss also reduces carrying capacity of estuaries, especially for higher trophic level species.

  • Inlet manipulations are driven by the need to enhance land-sea connectivity. Artificial breaching is the most prevalent activity in this category and isimplemented to alleviate back-flooding of poorly planned low-lying developments or agricultural land when the mouth closes (4;3). Reduced freshwater flow often results in increased inlet closure, higher sand bar levels, and increased flooding of surrounding environs (Stein et al., 2021). Closed conditions are associated with nuisance algae or macrophyte blooms in nutrient-enriched systems, with premature artificial breaching promoted as a mitigation measure. Premature breaching can alter seasonality in land-sea connectivity, while breaching at too low levels reduces scouring of accumulated sediment and organic matter, resulting in constrained tidal flows and shorter open periods. Inlet manipulation changes key hydrodynamics and biogeochemical processes with cascading effects on primary productivity, species composition, and recruitment of larval fish and invertebrates (4). Inlet manipulation may also induce estuary type changes, e.g., changing temporarily open systems to permanently open systems (van Niekerk et al., 2020).

  • Pollution, specifically nutrient enrichment, results in excessive primary production and associated secondary impacts such as hypoxia (low oxgen) and loss of associated ecosystem services (1). Eutrophication results in loss of submerged aquatic vegetation, oxygen depletion, harmful algae blooms, imbalanced food webs, lower biodiversity, altered biogeochemical cycling, and fish kills. Pollution can change an estuary from a macrophyte-dominated to a phytoplankton- or macroalgae-dominated system. Toxic substances, such as trace metals and persistent organic pollutants (e.g., herbicides and pesticides), also pose significant ecological and human health risks.

  • Estuaries function as nurseries and provide vital habitat for commercially important estuary-associated marine fish and invertebrates species (5). Fishing impact population size, biomass, sex-ratios, size/age distribution, community composition, trophic structure, and reproductive capacity. Depletion-driven declines in effective population size may also drive hybridization. Vulnerable life-history characteristics, e.g., estuary-dependence, ‘natal homing’ and predictable aggregations are amplified by anthropogenic pressures such as fishing, pollution, and flow modification, ultimately leading to recruitment failure or even extirpation.

  • Biological invasions by invasive alien species pose an ever-increasing threat to estuaries causing ecological and economic damage. Alien species can alter abiotic and biotic habitats, change sediment/water pathways, nutrient/biogeochemical cycling, impact community structure and functions by modifying spatial and food chain resources, with direct or indirect effects on indigenous species. Economic concerns include reduced food sources, burrowing activities destabilising embankments, clogging of desalination/cooling water plants, and predation of commercially important species. Habitat degradation reduces overall estuary ecosystem resilience to alien invasive species such as invasive North American cordgrass Spartina alterniflora and Asian mollusc Tarebia granifera (6).

Fresh water flow modification

More than a third of freshwater flows to estuaries is now abstracted (36 900 to 24 800 x 106 m3/a). The most significant reduction occurs in the Cool Temperate region, mainly due to reduce flow to the Orange Estuary, which drains more than 60% of the surface area of South Africa. Followed by the Warm Temperate region, while losses in the wetter Subtropical region are less. Arid predominantly closed systems are most severely impacted by flow modification. These estuary types have a high sensitivity to flow modification, as they are in hot, arid environments subjected to high evaporation rates. Estuarine types supported by relatively large catchments, such as Large fluvially dominated, Predominantly open, and Large temporarily closed systems, also experience high to very high flow modification pressures.

Activities that contribute significantly to flow modification include: run-of-river abstraction, dam development, alien vegetation infestation, return flows (e.g., wastewater and agriculture), groundwater abstraction, transfer schemes, hydroelectric schemes, and increased runoff from hardened catchment surfaces (e.g., urban development) (2). Of these, run-of-river freshwater abstraction, dams and weirs, and alien vegetation infestation are mainly responsible for decreasing inflow.

*MAP OF FLOW MODIFICATION

The management and mitigation of flow modification is primarily done through legislative interventions obligating the allocation of environmental flows to rivers, estuaries, and nearshore marine environment within an integrated water resources management framework (7,8). In South Africa all activities that impact streamflow should be regulated through the Water Resources Classification process, including groundwater abstraction, forestation, and return flow. Classification should strive to find a balance between ecological, social and economic needs ensuring that adequate flows are allocated to estuaries of high conservation and/or societal value to ensure their long-term sustainability and associated benefits.

Further, investment in effective compliance monitoring and regular auditing of water resource use, as well as long-term resource monitoring needs to be undertaken to inform streamflow management strategies and country-level trend indicators (e.g., State of the Environment, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Global Biodiversisty Framework (GBF) targets, conservation targets). Effective implementation of water resource management should also be supported by the development and implemetation of agriculture and forestry best practice guidelines, e.g., instituting buffer zones, manage return flow.

Activities that increase stream flow, e.g., wastewater inputs, are managed through permitting legislation (e.g. National Water Act and Integrated Coastal Management Act), while increase flow from hardened catchments and/or urban stormwater should be managed using innovative technologies such as Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS), artificial wetlands and ‘softening’ of catchments (1).

Much uncertainty exists regarding climate change impacts on streamflow, and research is urgently needed to downscale Global Climate models outputs for application in standard hydrological models and to reflect impact of extreme events (floods and droughts). Finally, investment should be made in in remote sensing technologies in support of estuarine hydrographic and hydrologic data collection and in automation of data integration into simulation modelling.

Pollution

Except for the Tropical region, substantial areas across all biogeographic regions experience severe pollution pressures, with the Cool Temperate and Subtropical regions the most effected. Most severely affected functional groups are the Large fluvially dominated systems, Predominantly open and Estuarine bays. Only Estuarine lagoons and Small fluvially dominated systems still experience low pollution pressure.

Wastewater discharges to estuaries totalling 655 000 m3/day. These are mostly from municipal WWTWs, with the highest volumes disposed of in the urban centres of Cape Town (Cool Temperate region) and Durban (Subtropical region). The only significant industrial discharge are from fish processing is in the Cool Temperate region. Diffuse urban runoff (stormwater) is a major source of pollution in rapidly growing urban areas, where informal settlements are often not connected to sewage reticulation systems. Municipalities often do not have resources or skills to repair or upgrade deteriorating infrastructure. As a result, WWTWs are often overloaded or malfunctioning causing spillage. Agricultural return flows are also cause marked water quality deterioration in estuaries (e.g., Sundays, Gamtoos estuaries). Solid waste (e.g., litter and single-use plastics) is an emerging concern in especially from urban areas and informal settlements. Most of these activities are on an increasing trajectory.

Key activities contribute to pollution pressure include wastewater discharges (municipal and industrial), urban stormwater runoff, agricultural return flow, solid waste (e.g., litter and plastics), and shipping activities (e.g., oil spills). Of these wastewater discharges, urban runoff, and agricultural return flows are the most significant. Rapid coastal development generates greater demand for WWTW facilities (1,2). Although most coastal municipalities have sewage reticulation systems that comply with permitted effluent concentration standards, effluent volumes are often higher than the assimilative capacity of receiving estuaries (1).

NoteBox 1: Harmful algal blooms in estuaries

Harmful algal blooms (HABs) are now recorded in 18% of South African estuaries in response to declining water quality. HABs are increasingly impacting the ecological integrity of South African estuaries, with bloom are predominantly concentrated along the Warm Temperate coastline (23 estuaries) and less frequent in Cold Temperate (n = 13) and Subtropical/Tropical (n = 15) regions. Some of the most common HAB impacts include hypoxia, reduced biodiversity, altered food webs, and mass faunal mortalities. The upward trajectory of HAB frequency and magnitude is strongly linked to increased anthropogenic nutrient loading, predominantly stemming from municipal wastewater, urban stormwater, and agricultural sources.

The microtidal and low-inflow nature of South African estuaries increases their susceptibility to HAB accumulations. Extensive blooms (Chl-a > 60 µg/L) were prevalent at least 27 estuaries, with Large Temporarily Closed estuary types showing the highest incidence. Concerning examples of HAB species documented in South African estuaries include the toxic Heterosigma akashiwo and Prymnesium parvum.

As global change pressures continue to intensify, targeted monitoring, interdisciplinary research, and integrated catchment-to-coast management interventions are required to mitigate the cascading impacts of HABs on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Most important is the management and reduction of pollution pressure (nutrients from WWTW, stormwater and agricultural return flow).

Pollution from WWTW should be better controlled through permitting and supported by water quality monitoring programmes. Urban stormwater management require forward thinking technologies such as SUDS, artificial wetlands, and the overall ‘softening’ of the catchments.

Agricultural best practice guidelines should promote wise use of fertilisers, herbicides, and pesticides; supported by market-driven incentives to reduce the use of harmful chemicals. Solid waste also should be addressed through permitting, supported by strategies to reduce plastics in the environment. Regulations to prevent and minimising pollution from ships’ operations or accidental causes should be better enforced and strengthened, where necessary.

The growing impacts of pharmaceuticals on estuarine biota and food resources, as well as impacts of plastic, light, and noise pollution urgently require research attention.

Fishing

Estuaries under sever fishing pressure have in crease from 15% to 21% to 28% between 2011, 2018 and 2025 (75% to78% to 85% area) severely comprising the multiple benefits derive from estuaries. Availability of cheap gillnets online (e.g. Temo, Takelot, Shein) have led to exponential increase in estuary fishing pressure. Estuaries, especially in KZN and Wild Coast, under severe pressure from illegal gillnetting. Fishing pressure is largely focussed on the larger types. For example, 100% of Estuarine lagoons and Estuarine bays are under severe pressure followed by Predominantly open, Estuarine lakes, and Large fluvially dominated systems. Most smaller estuary types, experience low to no fishing pressure.

Gillnetting is a indiscriminate fishing method that catches juvenile fish, macro invertebrates(crabs and prawns), birds, turtles and terrapins, water monitors and crocodiles. In response authorities launched DFFE Gillnet Reporting App hosted by OCIMS to monitor illegal catches and established a well co-ordinate compliance network in KZN. An example of success, is that in 2025 80% of nets are retrieved before they catch anything and for every 39 fish caught per illegal net retrieved 21 is released alive. Catches peaked in 2023/24.Compliance initiatives needs to be supported by community education and awareness, increase customs control (to stop imports), and collaboration with on-line retailers to foster self-regulation. The retailer Macro is example of self-regulation as they removed nets form stock once the company became aware of the cascading impacts on estuarine and coastal ecosystems.

*MAP OF FISHING PRESSURE

To ensure sustainable fishing, the exploitation of living resources should be controlled through appropriate catch/gear control measures (e.g., catch limits, size/slot limits), closed periods (spawning seasons, night ban on fishing), supported by investment in more effective compliance and enforcement, e.g., remote tracking systems, human resources, and estuarine resource monitoring programmes.

Biodiversity protection and stock recovery should be enhanced through increasing formal protection measures, e.g., Marine Protected Areas, closed area zonation and IUCN Red Listing of species, supported by restoration of critical nurseries.

Public awareness on the risk of over-exploitation and/or destructive fishing practices pose to estuary function and long-term societal benefits should be increased.

While fisheries management is a growing field, little is being done to predict, and manage impacts of cumulative pressures on estuarine fish resources, highlighting the need for research and development of such integrated approaches.

Land-use change and infrastructure development

The Warm and Cool Temperate regions are most affected, followed by the Subtropical region. Overall, agriculture is responsible for the most land cover transformation, while urban development contributes to a lesser degree. Land-use and development pressures are high to very high across most estuarine types, with Large fluvially dominated, Arid predominantly closed, Predominantly open, Large temporarily closed; Estuarine bays, and Estuarine lakes, and Small temporarily closed systems all under severe pressure. Only Estuarine lagoons and Small fluvially dominated systems experience low pressure, as these are well represented in protected areas.

Land-use and infrastructure development pressures are associated with activities in the EFZ: urban infrastructure (housing, resorts), transport infrastructure (roads, crossings, and culverts), riparian infrastructure (fences, bank stabilisation and low-lying developments), agriculture (crops, grazing), in-stream infrastructure (jetties and launch sites), forestry, mining, port, harbour and marina infrastructure, raw material harvesting for building (reeds, sedges and mangroves) and saltworks.

Urban development, agriculture, and transport infrastructure are responsible for most impacts, and to a lesser extent riparian and instream infrastructure and mining. Agriculture in the Cool and Warm Temperate regions mainly comprise croplands and grazing, while industrial-scale sugarcane farming dominates the Subtropical region. Burning reeds to improve grazing is a common practice in most regions. Road and railway bridges across estuaries impact sediment processes and the meandering nature of estuary inlets. Although the full extent of transport infrastructure could not be quantified, it is prevalent in all biogeographic regions. The Subtropical region is most affected by poorly planned road and railway infrastructure crossing 48 of 50 estuaries along a 150 km stretch in this region (Begg, 1978; van Niekerk et al., 2013). Commercial ports are located in five estuaries (Cool Temperate (1), Warm Temperate (2), Subtropical (2)), while fishing/yacht harbours and marinas occur in seven estuaries (Cool Temperate (3), Warm Temperate (2), Subtropical regions (2)).

Although mining activities may have a relatively small footprint, the marked increase in mining (and associated irreversible destruction of estuarine habitat) is a growing concern. Mining activities in the Cool and Warm Temperate regions comprise diamond, heavy minerals, and sand mining, and affect 3% and 1% of extent, respectively. Heavy mineral and sand mining are the dominant mining activities in the Subtropical region, with the latter having increased markedly in the past decade, with 71 sand mining operations located within 19 estuaries (affecting 358 ha of estuarine habitat) (GeoTerraImage, 2015; ORI unpublished data). Mining is an intense pressure, with long-term direct and indirect impacts on species and ecosystems. Its direct footprint involves clearing of natural habitat which is captured in land cover change. However, the indirect impacts of mining relating to water abstraction and contamination are not explicitly reflected in these datasets.

Other activities associated with land-use and development, include estuarine vegetation harvested (e.g., reeds, sedges, and mangroves) for housing, the construction of cattle enclosures and fish traps in rural areas. Salt works are confined to a few systems in the more arid parts of the Cool (3) and Warm (2) Temperate regions.

Most land-use and development activities, and their associated impact on estuaries, are on an increasing trajectory. Although commercial port infrastructure is considered stable and limited to only a few estuaries, small fishing and yacht harbours, as well as marina developments, are set to increase under a greater ‘blue economy’ development push.

Critical in mitigating Land-use and development impacts is the protection of ‘estuary space’ by spatially delineating and legally defining the estuary functional zone that encompass all critical habitats.

Legislation supporting cross-sectorial management, e.g., development of estuarine management plans needs to be strengthened, while strategic environmental impact (SEA) and environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes should be legally enforced for any development within estuary functional zone.

Legislation should be strengthened to prohibit extractive exploitation of non-living estuarine resources (e.g., mining) as they severely compromise estuary productivity and societal benefits over longer time-scales.

Management interventions to protect ecologically/socially important estuaries should be prioritised, e.g., formally protected areas, Ramsar sites, Important Bird Areas, Critical Biodiversity Areas, IUCN Red Listing of Ecosystems (Van Niekerk et al., 2019b).

A national restoration programme should be instituted to reinstate productivity/functionality in severely degraded, high-value systems. This includes investment in fine-scale mapping of historical and present land-use trends at landscape scales, and the development of remote sensing and planning technologies, as such knowledge are becoming essential in approaches to predict and manage change in estuaries at regional scales.

Mouth manipulations

Mouth manipulations are aimed at increasing land-sea connectivity and refers to artificial breaching, stabilisation, or canalisation, and diversion of mouths (2). Due to inappropriate coastal development, estuary mouths are manipulated to prevent property damage and/or ensure access. Artificial breaching to prevent back-flooding under closed mouth conditions is the most common activity. A small number of mouths are stabilised for navigation, while inlet diversion and/or stabilisation occur in urban areas.

Approximately 15% of estuaries are artificially manipulated, but disproportionally represent more than 60% of extent. While it occurs in all biogeographic regions, it is most often associated with urban centres of Cape Town, Mossel Bay, Port Elizabeth, and Durban. Estuarine lakes are most at risk from mouth manipulation, with most lakes under pressure, followed by Large fluvially dominated, and Large temporarily closed.

In South Africa, mouth manipulation stems from a policy gap where boundaries of properties are still determined by the ‘high water mark’ when an estuary is open, not accounting for back-flooding during closed conditions which serve as critical habitat. Consequently, inappropriate low-lying developments (i.e., inundated under natural breaching levels) are being protected at the cost of natural estuarine processes. Inlet manipulation is on an increasing trajectory. Further, there isa tendency to artificially breach systems well below natural breaching levels, causing increased sedimentation, reduced tidal flows, premature closures, and subsequent increase in long-term flood risk.

*MAP OF Artificial breaching

Legally binding protocols and procedures are required to guide the manipulation of inlets to ensure the benefits derived from estuaries are equitably distributed to all users, and not only riparian owners.

Legal protection of the estuary functional zone would assist in preventing inappropriate low-lying development that in many instances drives inlet manipulation.

Further innovative and automated remote sensing technologies (e.g., Sentinel-2 & 3, LiDAR, Smartphone applications) should be developed to monitor inlet behaviour.

Alien invasive plants

A third of estuaries have invasive terrestrial plants occurring within estuary functional zone, with 18 (6%) of these systems considered highly invaded. Aquatic invasive species have been recorded in 23 estuaries (8%). These are conservative estimates and are likely much more widespread, especially along the Warm Temperate and Subtropical regions. Alien invasive plants are most prevalent in Large fluvially dominated systems, followed by Predominantly Open and Large temporarily closed estuaries.

Terrestrial invasive species are introduced as garden plants, agricultural crops, or plantation escapees, while aquatic invasives are introduced through ornamental fish trade and garden water features.

Aquatic invasive plants result in a loss of ecosystem services, e.g., decreasing species diversity, forming homogenous habitats, and disrupting aquatic food webs. In total, 70 invasive plant species have been recoded in estuaries. Invasive Acacia species, particularly Rooikrans Acacia cyclops, and Eucalyptus trees were abundant along the Cool and Warm Temperate regions, originally introduced for dune reclamation, while Eucalyptus trees were likely planted for shade. Kikuyu grass Pennisetum clandestinum is also prevalent. A greater diversity of invasive alien plant species occurs along the Subtropical region. Dominant tree species include Brazilian pepper tree Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi, Casuarina equisetifolia, and Sesbania punicea. Urbanised estuaries along this region are highly disturbed and often the riparian vegetation consists only of invasive alien plants such as Spanish reed Arundo donax L., S. terebinthifolius, S. punicea and peanut butter bush Senna didymobotrya.

Disturbed catchments result in a similar invasive aquatic plant composition downstream. Despite biological control programmes, the water hyacinth Pontederia crassipes, remains the worst aquatic weed in South Africa. The species thrive in eutrophic conditions displacing endangered seagrass (e.g., Zostera capensis). When water hyacinth begins to invade the water surface, evaporation rates increase, stream flow decreases, and nutrient cycles become altered. Considering the effects of other IAPs, the fruits of S. terebinthifolius have inhibitory effects on other plants preventing growth surrounding these trees (Donnelly et al., 2008) and Lantana camara also produces allelopathic chemicals that inhibit plant growth and are poisonous when ingested, as is castor oil bush Ricinis communis (Verdien et al., 2012; www.invasives.org.za). Most of the activities listed above are on an increasing trajectory.

*MAP OF AIP

Invasive plant species management requires protocols/procedures aimed at early detection, risk assessment, and control of invasive alien plant species (e.g., complete eradication of Smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora from the Great Brak Estuary (Adams et al., 2012).

While government oversight programmes are crucial, local communities can play a key role in early detection, therefore the need for public awareness. However, invasive control programmes will only be successful if nutrient management strategies are also enforced (Adams et al., 2020). Long-term eradication also requires catchment clearing programmes. Research is needed to document and understand the spread of alien invasive plants in estuaries.

Alien or extralimital fish

About 35% of estuarine extent are under severe pressure from alien or extralimital fish invasion, mostly in Temperate regions. About 76% and 65% of Warm and Cool Temperate regions respectively, are subjected to severe levels. Less than 60% of area remains unaffected by alien or extralimital fish invasion, mostly in the Tropical region. Severe pressures are most prevalent in Predominantly open, Estuarine bays, Large temporarily closed; Large fluvially dominated, Large Temporarily closed and Estuarine lake types.

Settlement of alien and invasive species are a function of the degree of exposure to vectors, e.g., international shipping lanes and ports, aquaculture activities, aquarium trade, and fishing activities. Four key pathways include introduction for food security and sport fishing (e.g., trout fly fishing), release of ornamental fish (pet trade) and aquaculture. Apart from facilitating the import and establishment of AIS, marine and freshwater aquacultures have the potential to, directly and indirectly, impact wild populations through genetic, pathogenic, and parasitic contamination, as well as through overexploitation of brood-stock or indigenous fry and larvae for ranching purposes (2). There are 22 non-native and/or translocated fish species confirmed in 74 (out of 290) estuaries , with degraded estuaries found to be more vulnerable to colonisation than unimpacted systems. The Cool and Warm Temperate regions bear the brunt of introduced species, with the highest occurrence (7 – 9 species) recorded in the Permanently Open estuaries of these regions. Very low numbers of introduced species have been recorded in the Subtropical region, and none have been confirmed in the Tropical region.

*MAP OF ALIEN FISH

Understanding settlement patterns is important for the development of forward-looking alien monitoring and management strategies, including early detection, risk assessment, and control of invasive alien fish and invertebrate species. The combination of brackish waters colonised by physiologically generalist species, potentially unsaturated ecological niches, and high exposure to boat and ship traffic, leads to the highest potential infection rate for any aquatic environment.

Estuaries are exposed to two-sided invasion pressure, via the ocean and inland waters, highlighting the need to manage/eradicate invasive species in the river catchments feeding them.

Given the high risk of introduction of alien fish, pathogens and parasites associated with ornamental fish collection/aquarium trade, this sectors urgently requires stronger regulation and monitoring, through a permitting system and detailed environmental impact assessment studies. Similarly, current compliance efforts to control traditional medicine/muti trade need to be strengthened, especially as iconic fish species (e.g., CITES-listed Knysna seahorses) are being recorded in illegal trading activities.

Barring poisoning, existing populations can be controlled by promoting directed and innovative fishing efforts that could benefit local communities (Van Niekerk et al., 2020).

Awareness must be created among civil society and researchers on of the risk invasive species pose to estuaries and the need to clean fishing gear and boats between trips.

Research programs are needed that evaluate the impact of the full suite of invasive species in estuaries - marine, estuarine and freshwater – using innovative technologies such as eDNA and soundscapes. This includes understanding on the threats of associated pathogens, e.g., Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome (EUS), liver or lung flukes pose to indigenous species.

Heavily degraded Groot Brak Estuary (Source - Riaan Weitz)

Approach

To estimate degree of pressure associated with flow modification, land-use and development, inlet manipulation, and pollution, ratings of related indicators in South Africa’s Estuarine Health Index (EHI) were applied (Turpie et al., 2012). The EHI considers both abiotic (hydrology, hydrodynamics and mouth condition, water chemistry, physical habitat) and biotic (microalgae, macrophytes, invertebrates, fish, and birds) indicators.

Estuarine health is rated as similarity to natural (rated as 100) with pressure ratings correspond to: Low = >75% similar to natural (Categories A - B), Medium = 75 - 60 % (Category C), High = 60 – 40 % (Category D) and Very high = < 40% (Categories E - F).

For flow modification, the hydrological indicator, changes in low flow (60% of indicator rating) and floods (40% of indicator rating), or percentage reduction in mean annual runoff from natural, were used. For land-use and development, changes in physical habitat indicator were used to estimate degree of pressure.

The degree of pressure associated with inlet manipulation was derived from the hydrodynamic indicator, specifically similarity in inlet status. For pollution, a sub-indicator of water quality (scoring similarity in dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nutrients and toxic substances) was applied.

The degree of exploitation of living resources (largely focused on fishing), was derived from a combination of the fish indicator rating, moderated by the nature and magnitude of fishing effort (e.g., number of fishers, traps, gillnets versus fishing rods and handlines); catch composition; and size/age distributions of fish in sample data sets. ‘Very high’ pressure was associated with gillnetting or fish traps. ‘High’ and ‘Medium’ indicated relative levels of recreational and/or subsistence exploitation. ‘Low’ indicated little fishing pressure, however, all estuaries reflect some impact of adjacent beaches and nearshore over-fishing. A few systems where no fish are found (e.g., hypersaline estuaries) were rated as ‘None’.

To assess the degree of pressure from alien invasive plants, data from various national databases were used and categorised into aquatic and terrestrial plants. Their presence was recorded across different reaches (i.e., lower, middle, and upper estuary), while the degree of pressure was estimated on a three-tier scale relative to percentage coverage of EFZ area: Low = alien coverage <5%; Medium = alien coverage 5-15% and High = alien coverage >15%. Data on microalgal and macroalgal blooms were also assessed using similar method.

To evaluate pressure from alien or extralimital (translocated) fish species-level information was used from2. In addition, unpublished freshwater fish species data and field observations were considered (2). A species list per estuary was compiled and fish grouped into to (1) egg and larvae eaters (Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus, Mosquito fish Gambusia affinis, Guppy Poecilia reticulata), (2) habitat altering species (Carp Cyprinus carpio, Grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella) and (3) predatory species (Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu, Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus, Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides and Sharptooth catfish Clarias gariepinus). Pressure rating for alien or extralimital fish were derived from the number and type of fish species present in individual estuaries, being Low = 1-2 species, Medium = 3-4 species, High = 5-6 species or 1-2 predatory species or Sharptooth catfish Clarias gariepinus present (if translocated/ extralimital) or Very High = >7 species or 3- 4 predatory species.

Technical documentation

Code repositories

Key publications

Niekerk, L. van, S. Taljaard, S. J. Lamberth, J. B. Adams, S. P. Weerts,and C. F. MacKay. 2022. “Disaggregation and Assessment of estuarine pressures at the country-level to better inform management and resource protection the South African experience.” African Journal of Aquatic Science, April. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2989/16085914.2022.2041388.

Adams, J. B. B., S. Taljaard, L. van Niekerk, and D. A. Lemley. 2020.“Nutrient Enrichment as a threat to the ecological resilience and health of South African microtidal estuaries.” African Journal of Aquatic Science 45 (1-2): 23–40. https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2019.1677212.

References

1. Adams, J.B.B. et al. 2020. Nutrient enrichment as a threat to the ecological resilience and health of south african microtidal estuaries. African Journal of Aquatic Science 45: 23–40. https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2019.1677212
2. Niekerk, L. van et al. 2022. Disaggregation and assessment of estuarine pressures at the country-level to better inform management and resource protection the South African experience. African Journal of Aquatic Science.
3. Van Niekerk, L. et al. 2013. Country-wide assessment of estuary health: An approach for integrating pressures and ecosystem response in a data limited environment. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 130: 239–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2013.05.006
4. Whitfield, A. et al. 2012. A review of the ecology and management of temporarily open/closed estuaries in south africa, with particular emphasis on river flow and mouth state as primary drivers of these systems. African Journal of Marine Science 34: 163–180. https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2012.675041
5. Lamberth, S.J. & J.K. Turpie. 2003. The role of estuaries in south african fisheries: Economic importance and management implications. African Journal of Marine Science 25: 131–157. https://doi.org/10.2989/18142320309504005
6. Adams, J.B. et al. 2012. Plant traits and spread of the invasive salt marsh grass, spartina alterniflora loisel., in the great brak estuary, south africa. African Journal of Marine Science 34: 313–322. https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2012.725279
7. Van Niekerk, L. et al. 2019. Assessing and planning future estuarine resource use: A scenario-based regional-scale freshwater allocation approach. Science of The Total Environment 657: 1000–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.033
8. Stein, E.D. et al. 2021. Advancing the Science of Environmental Flow Management for Protection of Temporarily Closed Estuaries and Coastal Lagoons. Water 13: 595. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13050595