ACCESS NUMBER: M14PD00048

STUDY TITLE: Review of the Long-term Monitoring Program and the Associated Data 

of the Long-term Monitoring Program at the Flower Garden Banks National Marine 

Sanctuary

REPORT TITLE: Review of the Long-term Monitoring Program and the Associated Data 

of the Long-term Monitoring Program at the Flower Garden Banks National Marine 

Sanctuary

CONTRACT NUMBER: M14PD00048

SPONSORING OCS REGION: Gulf of Mexico

APPLICABLE PLANNING AREA(S): Western and Eastern Planning Areas

FISCAL YEAR(S) OF PROJECT FUNDING: 2014–2016

COMPLETION DATE OF REPORT: June 1, 2016

COSTS: $115,514.27

PROJECT MANAGER(S): Nola Uchtmann

AFFILIATION: Hawai’i International Environmental Services, Inc.

ADDRESS: 70 Kihapai Street, Kailua, HI 96734

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR(S)

*

: Hawai’i International Environmental Services, Inc.

KEY WORDS: Flower Garden Banks, Long-term Monitoring, Coral

BACKGROUND: The Flower Garden Banks are two seafloor mounds located 

approximately 110 miles southeast of Galveston, Texas. They are the largest 

topographic features on the continental shelf of the northern Gulf of Mexico, with thriving 

coral reefs and abundant marine life covering over 350 acres. The coral populations at 

the Flower Garden Banks are considered to be one of the healthiest in the Gulf of 

Mexico. BOEM has monitored these banks since 1970s to develop a long-term 

database related to the environmental health of the East and West Flower Garden 

Banks. In 1988, a 10,000 m2 area was set up on each mound within the coral cap to 

serve as a data collection area for the long-term monitoring program. Since then, 

monitoring of these sites has remained the central collection location for the program. 

Although the locations have remained the same, multiple contractors have been 

responsible for the data collection and analyses, and there has been a certain degree of 

variation among techniques and analyses throughout the years as technology for 

collecting and analyzing underwater data has advanced. As with any long-term 

monitoring program, there needs to be a certain degree of flexibility to modify, remove, 

or add sampling effort or sampling techniques; however, to do this a program must 

continually be reviewed and evaluated to determine if the program is meeting its stated 

goals or reaching its objectives. Before this project, there had not been an independent, 
ACCESS NUMBER: M14PD00048

external review of the long-term monitoring program at the Flower Garden Banks 

National Marine Sanctuary. 

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this project was to conduct an independent 

evaluation of the long-term monitoring program at the Flower Garden Banks National 

Marine Sanctuary. This project determined the overall quality of the long-term 

monitoring program to effectively assess coral ecosystem health. This includes, but was 

not limited to, objectives, techniques, frequency, and analyses. The secondary objective 

of this project was to provide recommendations for moving the program forward to 

ensure cost-effectiveness while maintaining the scientific integrity required for achieving 

the stated objectives.

DESCRIPTION: The FGBLTM program was evaluated for strengths and weaknesses 

for each project objective using comparisons to other established LTM programs around 

the world, relevant peer-reviewed publications, and recommendations from other, more 

extensive studies conducted at FGB. These comparisons and evaluations were used to 

make recommendations for program improvement that included considerations of cost 

effectiveness. 

SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS: The FGBLTM program is a valuable tool that would 

benefit from several recommended changes. Some of the more pertinent of these 

changes are: developing clear program objectives; creating standard operating 

procedures for every method of data collection; ensuring the area surveyed is truly 

representative of the target population; and ensuring that LTM conclusions are based 

on supportable, statistically rigorous results. 

STUDY RESULTS: Each area of evaluation was found to have room for modifications 

that could significantly impact the overall success of the monitoring program in terms of 

scientific integrity and continuity among survey years. In program design the most 

important recommendations were the immediate development of clear program goals 

and objectives, creation of standard operating procedures for each data collection 

method, and additional study sites at each bank to improve representativeness and 

replication. This would require an alternative sampling schedule, and a rotating panel 

design was suggested.

The program methods were evaluated individually, and several changes were 

recommended. The most common was that sample frequency be reduced for most 

methods to mitigate costs of increasing sample size. Additional recommendations 

included the following: permanent quadrats return to collecting coral tissue growth data, 

the lateral growth method be discontinued, coral health surveys change to belt 

transects, fish surveys include benthic data, and water quality samples include 

photosynthetically active radiation measurements and hydrocarbons and heavy metals 

associated with oil and natural gas drilling.

Power analysis results and review of quantitative analyses being used showed that 

statistical methods needed significant improvement. The most crucial recommendation, 

which applied to every method, was that conclusions be based on quantitative and 
ACCESS NUMBER: M14PD00048

statistically supported results rather than qualitative comparisons and apparent trends. 

For most methods the types of analyses should also be modified to improve statistical 

power, namely shifting from parametric, univariate analyses to non-parametric and/ or 

multivariate options. Also, analyses should evaluate to more than one survey period, 

which has been the common procedure, to facilitate trend analysis and provide a longterm view of data and overall reef status. Each method also had more specific 

suggestions for analysis modifications to improve statistical power and overall 

interpretation.

STUDY PRODUCT(S): Complete program evaluation report, technical summary, final 

presentation, power analysis results and metadata.

 

*P.I.’s affiliation may be different than that listed for Project Manager(s).