For too long, the government of Canada has bowed to the pressures of special interest groups and has avoided committing areas for no-take reserves on the Pacific Coast. In researching this topic I was surprized to see that several Marine Protected Areas have been created in Eastern Canada in the past year, but none in BC.
The reference on the RAMSAR convention (http://www.ramsar.org/key_brochure_2004_e.htm) provides a valuable source of information about the conservation and wise use of all wetlands. The estuaries and mudflats of the Pacific Coast are exactly the kind of ecosystem that this international convention targets. After defining the wetlands the following is stated as their idea of “Wise Use” .
- And wise use?
Wise use is defined as “sustainable utilization for the benefit of mankind in a way compatible with the maintenance of the natural properties of the ecosystem” .
Sustainable utilization is understood as “human use of a wetland so that it may yield the greatest continuous benefit to present generations while maintaining its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of future generations”.
“Wise use” therefore has conservation of wetlands, as well as their management and restoration, at its heart.
- The process for nominating a site in Canada can be found here in Tools for implementing the COnvention on Wetlands. http://www.wetkit.net/modules/2/sub_category.php?parent_cat_id=209&cat_id=229
- Why are there no RAMSAR sites in theOceanic Regions of Canada. See this map..(http://www.aquatic.uoguelph.ca/wetlands/chramsar.htm ? A good idea for a take away action item.
from: Marine Fisheries Systems:
http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.287.aspx.pdf
18.6.3 Effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas Marine protected areas with no-take reserves at their core can reestablish the natural structures that have enabled earlier fisheries to maintain themselves. (See also Chapter 4.) MPAs are not a recent concept. Historically, many fisheries were sustained be- cause a portion of the target population was not accessible. Most targeted fisheries were offshore or in areas adjacent to lands with low human populations and therefore subject to relatively low threat. However, modern fishing technology for mapping the sea- bed and for finding and preserving fish (artificial ice and blast freezing) expanded the reach of fishing fleets. A number of recent studies have demonstrated that MPAs can help in managing fisheries (Roberts et al. 2002). Most of these studies have covered spatially small areas and primarily in tropical shelf systems, although emerging studies from temperate areas, such as New Zealand and Chile, have also demonstrated MPA effectiveness. However, other studies have found that MPAs have not delivered the expected benefits of protecting species and their habitats (Hilborn et al. 2004; Edgar and Barrett 1999; Willis et al. 2003). In many cases failure was due to either not including MPAs as part of a broader coastal management system or a lack of man- agement effectiveness, funding, or enforcement. In the Gulf of Mexico, for example, the establishment of MPAs merely shifted fishing effort to other areas and increased the vulnerability of other stocks and endangered species (Coleman et al. 2004). Knowledge on the size and location of MPAs that can act as effective buffers against the impacts of fishing requires further research.It has been widely and repeatedly demonstrated that marine protected areas, particularly no-take marine reserves, are essential to maintain and restore biodiversity in coastal and marine areas (COMPASS and NCEAS 2001). Their wide-scale adoption is inhibited by the perception that biodiversity is unimportant relative to fishers’ access to exploitable resources. Therefore, the propo- nents of marine reserves have been saddled with the additional task of demonstrating that setting up no-take reserves will increase fisheries yields in the surrounding areas, as well as determining the appropriate size and siting of marine reserves that are needed to at least sufficiently offset the loss of fishing grounds. This requirement, combined with initiatives by recreational fishers as- serting rights to fish, has effectively blocked the creation of marine reserves in many parts of the world. Thus while the cumulative area of marine protected areas is now about 1% of the world’s oceans, only about one tenth of that—0.1% of the world’s oceans—is effectively a no-take area. This gives an air of unreality to suggestions that 20% and an opti- mum of 30 –50% of the world’s ocean should be protected from fishing to prevent the loss of some species now threatened with extinction and to maintain and rebuild some currently depleted commercial stocks (National Research Council 2001; Roberts et al. 2002; Airame et al. 2003; Agardy et al. 2003). Even the more modest CBD target of 10% MPA coverage by 2012 will be hard to reach. One approach to resolving this dilemma is to take an adaptive management approach so that the use of MPAs within a suite of fisheries management options can be assessed and modified as new information emerges and lessons learned are shared (Hilborn et al. 2004). This avoids unrealistic expectations on the improved performance of MPAs. Any approach to the use of MPAs in man- aging marine ecosystems would also benefit enormously from including performance monitoring and enforcement programs to address some of the management problems that have traditionally hindered effectiveness (Coleman et al. 2004). If properly located and within a context of controlled fishing capacity, no-take marine reserves enhance conventional fisheries management outcomes. They may, in some cases, reduce catches in the short term, but they should contribute significantly to im- proving fishers’ livelihoods as well as biodiversity over the mid to long term. Marine reserves generally perform this way in inshore shelf systems (such as reefs); many case studies, as shown in Saba Marine Park (Netherlands Antilles), Leigh Marine Reserve (New Zealand), and Sumilon Island Reserve (Philippines), are described in detail in Roberts and Hawkins (2000) to support this. How- ever, understanding of the effectiveness of marine reserves in managing fisheries in deeper oceanic areas is more limited. Further, the protection and monitoring of these deep-sea areas and other undamaged areas may, in line with the precautionary princi- ple, avoid the need for mitigation or restoration of the systems later, when costs are likely to be higher (and in some cases restoration may not be viable). Already, the demand for fish resources has pushed fishing fleets into international waters, and as other resources become scarcer in national waters (such as gas, oil, minerals, and carbon sinks), conflicts over the best use of these common resources and spaces will increase. Hence the growing call for ocean zoning, including the creation of no-take zones that would reestablish the reserves that were once in place due to vessels lacking the tech- nology to gain access to deeper, offshore areas, which in the past has protected exploited species.
2. DRAFT PLAN CALLS FOR ONE THIRD OF GREAT BARRIER REEF MARINE PARK TO BE NO-TAKE, MPA NEWS Vol. 4, No. 11 June 2003
http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA42.htm
3. Marine Protected Areas of the United States http://mpa.gov/
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are valuable tools for conserving the nation’s natural and cultural marine resources as part of an ecosystem approach to management. The United States has many types of MPAs for many purposes, including conservation of natural heritage, cultural heritage and sustainable production. Learn more about the national effort to build an effective national system of marine protected areas.
4 Australian MPAs http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/index.html
5.WWF: Our Solutions: Marine Protected Areas http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/marine/our_solutions/protected_areas/index.cfm
Only 0.6% of the world’s oceans are protected, and the vast majority of existing marine parks and reserves suffer from little or no effective management. This is despite the fact that MPAs not only help safeguard biodiversity, they can also benefit fisheries and people.he benefits offered by MPAs include:
• Maintaining biodiversity and providing refuges for species
• Protecting important habitats from damage by destructive fishing practices and other human activities and allowing damaged areas to recover
• Providing areas where fish are able to spawn and grow to their adult size
• Increasing fish catches (both size and quantity) in surrounding fishing grounds
• Building resilience to protect against damaging external impacts, such as climate change
• Helping to maintain local cultures, economies, and livelihoods which are intricately linked to the marine environment
• Serving as benchmarks for undisturbed, natural ecosystems, that can be used to measure the effects of human activities in other areas, and thereby help to improve resource management
6. The Science of Marine Reserves
http://www.piscoweb.org/outreach/pubs/reserves
This site has a good set of videos.
These resources provide the latest scientific information about reserves in an understandable and accessible format. They are designed to be used by natural resource managers, government officials, scientists, and the interested public. To view the video by segment or a PDF version of the U.S. booklet, international booklet, or 2002 booklet, please click on the links below.
7.CPAWS About Marine Protected Areas
http://www.cpawsbc.org/marine/mpas/index.php
Benefits of Marine Reserves:
>Conservation of commercial resources
> Protection of critical and unique habitats
> Conservation of endangered or threatened species
> Scientific research and monitoring
> Enhancement of recreation and tourism opportunities
> Socioeconomic benefits for coastal communities
> Evidence that MPAs work
8. MPA News
http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/
5.8 The Ecological Footprint
Return to Index
