How to design highly effective marine protected areas Callum Roberts Prof Marine Conservation University of York, UK Photo: Alex Mustard
What makes an MPA effective? Percentage difference from unprotected areas NEOLI (no take, enforced, old, large, isolated) Number of NEOLI Features Number of NEOLI Features Edgar et al. (2014) Nature doi:10.1038/nature13022
No take Enforced Old Large Isolated Photo: Alex Mustard
No take Enforced Old Large Isolated Targets a broad spectrum of biodiversity Is strategically planned Photo: Alex Mustard
Why do MPAs need to be highly protected? Fishing down the foodweb None Fishing intensity Extremely high
The fisheries management dilemma Managing for these species
The fisheries management dilemma means losing these
Biomass of large animals/habitat complexity This curve has two messages: 1. The biggest losses come early on. A little fishing has a disproportionately large impact. Fishing intensity
Protecting up the foodweb 2. A lot of protection is needed to bring back the vulnerable and near disappeared Highly protected marine reserve Fishing intensity Business as usual fishing
Old? Leigh Marine Reserve New Zealand Established 1975
Photo: Alex Mustard Highly protected MPAs produce rapid results, but benefits build up for decades
Cabo Pulmo, Mexico 11 times increase in top predator biomass in 10 years Aburto-Oropeza et al. (2011) PLoS One
Photo: Alex Mustard Big, old fat, female, fecund, fish
Female Sebastes borealis, 1.1m long and approximately 100 years old
Recovery of large, old fish takes time Source: Russ and Alcala (2004) Oecologia 138: 622-27.
Recovery, especially of habitats, can take decades Temperate reserves Source: Babcock et al. (2010) PNAS 107: 18256-61
Benefits are quickly erased when protected areas are reopened to fishing Solomon Islands periodic reef closure
Benefits are quickly erased when protected areas are reopened to fishing CPUE (kg/fisher/hour) Solomon Islands periodic reef closure Total effort (hrs/day) Source: Cohen and Alexander (2013) PLoS One
Old: We should approach MPA establishment on the assumption that they will be permanent Photo: Alex Mustard
Large
Coming soon Pitcairn (UK) 800,000 km 2 Desaventuras (Chile) > 200,000 km 2 Easter Island (Chile) > 600,000 km 2 Kermadec Islands (New Zealand) 620,000 km 2 Photo: National Geographic
Higher biodiversity Bigger populations Lower risk of extinction Fewer edge effects Greater resilience Reasons to be large Photo: Alex Mustard
St Lucia, Caribbean 2.6 hectare reserve Small MPAs can also work if well protected and enforced
Isolated Photo: Alex Mustard
The work of three American Presidents: Clinton, Bush and Obama
Proximity of coral reef MPAs to human population centres MPAs are farther from population centres than expected by chance Source: Maire et al. (2016) Ecology Letters
Øresund, Sweden: Busy shipping lane No trawling since 1930s 4 million people live on its shores Cod are 15-40 times more abundant here than in trawling grounds immediately to the north. They also reach much larger sizes, as do lemon sole, haddock, plaice and whiting. Svedäng (2010)
Targets a broad spectrum of biodiversity Photo: Alex Mustard
Job done? Are we already past 10%? Good MPAs should give protection to a broad spectrum of biodiversity, not just a handful of species
Strategic planning Photo: Alex Mustard Habitat & species representation and replication Connectivity Climate adaptation and resilience Fisheries value etc
The best MPAs are strategically planned in ecologically connected networks
Strategic network planning increases biodiversity representation, achieving targets at lower MPA coverage Number of species represented MPAs placed at random MPAs chosen to maximise species represented 0% 100% Percentage of total area covered
New Zealand deep water bottom trawl closures Strategically planned This network has been strategically designed to minimise economic impact! 1. Few target fish 2. Too deep to trawl 3. Fished out 4. Too rough to trawl 5. Already a no-trawl zone
Never overlook opportunities Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity Seneca
How much of the sea should we protect? Synthesis of 144 studies Asked a variety of questions, such as how much of the sea should we protect to: Maximise fish catches? Minimise risk of stock collapse? Protect stock genetic diversity? Represent all species in protected areas? Achieve appropriate size and spacing recommendations for protected areas? etc We took a percentage figure from each study that achieved, maximised or optimised benefits against the stated goal considered
Number of Studies 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0-10 10% by 2020: Convention on Biological Diversity target and UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 11-20 21-30 30% by 2030: World Parks Congress (2014) target 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 Average 37% Median 35% N = 144 studies 71-80 81-90 Recommended Coverage for Protection (%) 91-100 O Leary, Roberts et al. (2016) Effective coverage targets for ocean protection Conservation Letters
Marine target Urgently increase the ocean area that is effectively and equitably managed in ecologically represented and wellconnected systems of MPAs or other effective conservation measures by 2030; these should include strictly protected areas that amount to at least 30% of each marine habitat
Number of Studies 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cumulative frequency (%) 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 Recommended Coverage for Protection (%) E.O. Wilson s Half Earth Solution