Part of the regional summary: St. Eustatius
More about this place: Sint Eustatius on Wikipedia

A purpose-built artificial reef in St. Eustatius National Marine Park: concrete rings, arches, slabs, and steel hoops laid across a volcanic sand plain, now covered mainly by sponges, with small young coral colonies settling on the structures. Grunts and squirrelfish pack the concrete framework; introduced lionfish and orange cup coral are also on record. Wreck and artificial-structure site: this cover value counts coral growing on man-made structure (steel, concrete, wreck debris) and the bottom around it, so it isn't comparable with natural-reef cover, although it is counted in the St. Eustatius regional mean, which pools three artificial structures and one natural reef.
Een speciaal aangelegd kunstrif in het St. Eustatius National Marine Park: betonnen ringen, bogen, platen en stalen hoepels, neergelegd op een vulkanische zandvlakte en nu vooral begroeid met sponzen, met kleine jonge koraalkolonies die zich op de constructies vestigen. Grombaarzen en eekhoornvissen vullen het betonnen raamwerk; ook geïntroduceerde koraalduivels en oranje bekerkoraal zijn waargenomen. Wrak- en kunstconstructielocatie: deze bedekkingswaarde telt koraal dat groeit op door mensen gemaakte constructies (staal, beton, wrakresten) en de bodem eromheen, en is dus niet vergelijkbaar met de bedekking van natuurlijke riffen, hoewel ze wel meetelt in het regionale gemiddelde van St. Eustatius, dat drie kunstmatige constructies en één natuurlijk rif samenvoegt.
AI translation of this summary; the English is authoritative.
Eight independent survey stations shown with the program’s logo — click one to see how far it is from this site.
Three other CRD dive sites with their own pages within 5 km shown in orange — click a marker to open its page.
These are unedited originals; edited versions will replace them.
18 of the 49 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.
STENAPA Reef, St. Eustatius National Marine Park, dived 24 February 2026 — the first dive of the day. This is a purpose-built artificial reef, not a natural one, and the photographs make that unmistakable: the whole dive works a scatter of engineered objects set down on an open sand plain. Conditions were hazy with visible suspended particulate; several wide frames are blue-cast and low-contrast, which limits color-based condition scoring (e.g., Image 9).
Visibility was poor to moderate; wide shots go milky within 10-15 m while close work stays sharp.
Frames show large steel hoops and rebar rings lying flat on the sand, cast concrete blocks with arched window-like openings standing in a line, right-angled concrete beam-and-slab frameworks, and flat plates with drilled circular ports (e.g., Image 7, Image 21, Image 36).
Sponges, not corals, are the dominant cover on the structures (e.g., Image 16).
Yellow and orange tube sponges (Aplysina-type), branching lime-green rope sponges, maroon and scarlet encrusting sheets, pale green encrusting patches, and a pink-brown vase sponge cover most of the hard surface, with pink crustose coralline algae, filamentous turf, and small purple gorgonian sprigs filling the gaps (e.g., Image 29, Image 30, Image 34).
Stony coral is present but sparse and small-colonied: a cluster of knobby mustard-brown Porites-type colonies with pale pink margins, a single clean circular meandroid brain coral (Pseudodiploria/Diploria-type) about a hand-span across, a small yellow-green ridged coral resting on open sand beside a rope sponge, scattered mustard Porites astreoides-type domes on the flat plates, and a few small recruits dotting the concrete (e.g., Image 26, Image 40, Image 42, Image 46, Image 47).
Between the built objects the bottom is fine gray-green volcanic sand, and one stretch of the dive crosses a dense seagrass meadow where dark-bodied fish with trailing dorsal filaments, consistent with French angelfish, drift over the blades — too dim to confirm the identification (e.g., Image 33).
Stony corals are small, isolated heads rather than builders (e.g., Image 11).
Four blurred macros show a cream-pale colony with fully extended polyps — too out of focus to call bleaching either way.
The photo review resolved no clearly bleached coral tissue, and the few colonies present look normally pigmented; a computer-vision point count called 3.4% of coral points bleached (2 of 103 photos), but one of those two frames shows a marginal tissue-loss band (possible disease) rather than bleaching: a cream-white band around the whole margin of one colony, edged by a thin yellow rim (photo not shown). The other is a pale massive colony in blue-cast light that cannot be confirmed as bleaching. Two introduced species are on record here: lionfish and orange cup coral Tubastraea coccinea (e.g., Image 8).
Fish use the structure heavily (e.g., Image 3).
One frame holds a dense mixed aggregation of grunts and squirrelfish packed into the concrete framework; another shows yellow-lined goatfish and snapper working the sand alongside the structure line (e.g., Image 18).
A long-spined sea urchin (Diadema antillarum) is tucked into a crevice, spines intact.
Hoeksema et al. (2022) surveyed this site (STENAPA), 0.02 km from the pin. Within 5 km, eight independent stations (Reef Check and XL Catlin Seaview Survey) recorded station-year means of 0.7–38% hard coral cover between 2005 and 2013; the nearest of these, XL Catlin Seaview Survey at transect 25015, 1.63 km away, read 2.0% in 2013.
A historic glass bottle lies on the sand.
| Method | Hard coral cover (%) | Photos (n) ± SE |
|---|---|---|
| In-house DINOv3 | 18.0 | n = 103 · SE 0.9 |
| CoralSCOP unedited | 20.3 | n = 103 · SE 1.4 |
| Claude | 4.6 | n = 103 · SE 0.7 |
The two computer-vision methods agree within 2.3 pp (18.0–20.3%) and read 13.4–15.7 pp above Claude's blind point count (4.6%); the headline is Claude's blind point count because no transect or manual count exists here.
See a more detailed, stand-alone version of this table.
| Agency / program | Year(s) | Stations / distance | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reef Check | 2005–2010 | 5 stations, 2.04–3.75 km | Records ↓ |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | 2013 | 3 stations, 1.63–4.67 km | Records ↓ |
Coral Reef DiagnosticsYear-average (illustrative only, programs differ)Within 5 km, 8 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 18 surveys between 2005 and 2013. Of the 4 stations surveyed in more than one year, 3 declined (by 1.0–20 points) and 1 increased (by 14 points) between their first and latest surveys. The longest record, Barracuda Reef Line 1 (Reef Check, 2.04 km away), went from 28% in 2005 to 26% in 2010 (mean of 2 surveys). The most recent nearby survey is from 2013, so these values predate recent heat stress. This site's own estimate (4.6%) sits 2.6 points above the range of these station-year means up to 2 km away (0.7–2.0%), inside the 7-point method-noise floor (inconclusive); the methods differ, so the comparison is context, not a like-for-like test.
Collected by other programs using different methods (Reef Check uses point-intercept transects; the XL Catlin Seaview Survey uses photo-transects with automated image annotation), so these are context for the figures above, not a like-for-like comparison. Where a station was surveyed more than once, the cell shows either the range of its values or, as a single value, the mean of surveys made in one year. Station names are not dive-site names.
| Agency | Site / location | Date | Hard coral cover (%) | Distance | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reef Check | Barracuda Reef Line 1 | 2005–2010 | 11–28% (range of yearly means; 6 surveys) | 2.04 km | — |
| Reef Check | Barracuda Reef Line 2 | 2005–2007 | 24–25% (2 surveys) | 2.04 km | — |
| Reef Check | Mushroom Garden Line 1 | 2005–2009 | 9.4–33% (4 surveys) | 3.17 km | — |
| Reef Check | Mushroom Garden Line 2 | 2005–2007 | 24–38% (2 surveys) | 3.17 km | — |
| Reef Check | Twin Sisters | 2009 | 16% | 3.75 km | — |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 25015 | 2013 | 2.0% | 1.63 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 25016 | 2013 | 0.7% | 1.66 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 25017 | 2013 | 4.4% | 4.67 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
All images from Coral Reef Diagnostics. Data are from Coral Reef Diagnostics and the organizations named in the data sources above.
© Coral Reef Diagnostics.