tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/marine-conservation-zones-8872/articlesMarine Conservation Zones – The Conversation2019-03-15T03:15:48Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1129602019-03-15T03:15:48Z2019-03-15T03:15:48ZMost recreational fishers in Australia support marine sanctuaries<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/262090/original/file-20190305-48444-nubyxx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=3%2C11%2C1242%2C429&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Recreational fishers adjacent to an established marine park in NSW.
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>More than 70% of recreational fishers support no-take marine sanctuaries according to our research, published recently in <a href="https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/recreational-fishers-support-for-no-take-marine-reserves-is-high-">Marine Policy</a>. </p>
<p>This study contradicts the popular perception that fishers are against establishing no-take marine reserves to protect marine life. In fact, the vast majority of fishers we surveyed agreed that no-take sanctuaries improve marine environmental values, and do not impair their fishing. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-than-1-200-scientists-urge-rethink-on-australias-marine-park-plans-84366">More than 1,200 scientists urge rethink on Australia's marine park plans</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>No-take marine sanctuaries, which ban taking or disturbing any marine life, are widely recognised as vital for conservation. However, recent <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/gone-too-far-anglers-spear-government-over-proposed-marine-park-20180907-p502fu.html">media coverage</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-17/nsw-government-backs-down-on-fishing-bans-for-sydney-marine-park/10255432">policy decisions</a> in Australia suggest recreational fishers are opposed to no-take sanctuary zones created within marine parks. </p>
<p>This perceived opposition has been reinforced by recreational fishing interest groups who aim to represent fishers’ opinions in policy decisions. However, it was unclear whether the opinions expressed by these groups matches those of fishers on-the-ground in established marine parks.</p>
<p>To answer this, we visited ten state-managed marine parks across Western Australia, South Australia, Queensland and New South Wales. We spoke to 778 fishers at boat ramps that were launching or retrieving their boats to investigate their attitudes towards no-take sanctuary zones.</p>
<p>Our findings debunk the myth that recreational fishers oppose marine sanctuaries. We found 72% of active recreational fishers in established marine parks (more than 10 years old) support their no-take marine sanctuaries. Only 9% were opposed, and the remainder were neutral.</p>
<p>We also found that support rapidly increases (and opposition rapidly decreases) <em>after</em> no-take marine sanctuaries are established, suggesting that once fishers have a chance to experience sanctuaries, they come to support them. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/262091/original/file-20190305-48441-yj20k4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Recreational fishers support for marine sanctuaries increases with marine park age.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fishers in established marine parks were also overwhelmingly positive towards marine sanctuaries. Most thought no-take marine sanctuaries benefited the marine environment (78%) and have no negative impacts on their fishing (73%).</p>
<p>We argue that recreational fishers, much like other Australians, support no-take marine sanctuaries because of the perceived environmental benefits they provide. This is perhaps not surprising, considering that appreciating nature is one of the <a href="http://fish.gov.au/Archived-Reports/2012/reports/Documents/Henry_and_Lyle_2003.pdf">primary reasons many people go fishing</a> in the first place.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263584/original/file-20190313-123531-13qjo7p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Exploring marine life within an established marine park.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tim Langlois</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the past opposition from recreational fishing groups has been cited in the decision to scrap proposed <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-17/nsw-government-backs-down-on-fishing-bans-for-sydney-marine-park/10255432">no-take sanctuaries around Sydney</a>, to open up <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/site-archive/rural/news/content/201303/s3714422.htm">established no-take sanctuaries to fishing</a> and to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/sneaky-coalition-move-to-change-marine-park-rules-20131214-2ze8v.html">reduce sanctuaries within the Australia Marine Parks</a> (formerly the Commonwealth Marine Reserve network). </p>
<p>Our findings suggest that these policy decisions do not reflect the beliefs of the wider recreational fishing community, but instead represent the loud voices of a minority.</p>
<p>We suggest that recreational fishing groups and policy makers should survey grass roots recreational fishing communities (and other people who use marine parks) to gauge the true level of support for no-take marine sanctuaries, before any decisions are made.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-backflip-over-sydneys-marine-park-is-a-defiance-of-science-102499">The backflip over Sydney's marine park is a defiance of science</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Despite what headlines may say, no-take marine sanctuaries are unlikely to face long lasting opposition from recreational fishers. Instead, our research suggests no-take marine sanctuaries provide a win-win: protecting marine life whilst fostering long term support within the recreational fishing community.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/112960/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Navarro received funding from the Australian Marine Conservation Society and the Jock Clough Marine Foundation to conduct this research. He currently receives funding under the Australian Government National Environmental Sciences Program to investigate biodiversity and socio-economics benchmarks within the Australian Marine Park network.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Marit Kragt receives funding from a range of sources including the Australian Marine Conservation Society, and is a recipient of an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE160101306). She is on the Board of Directors of the Australasian Agricultural & Resource Economics Society (AARES), and serves as an associate editor for the Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Langlois received funding from the Australian Marine Conservation Society and the Jock Clough Marine Foundation to conduct this research. He currently receives funding under the Australian Government National Environmental Sciences Program to investigate biodiversity and socio-economics benchmarks within the Australian Marine Park network.
</span></em></p>The overwhelming majority of recreational fishers support no-fishing marine sanctuaries.Matt Navarro, Post-doctoral Fellow, The University of Western AustraliaMarit E. Kragt, Associate professor and PVC (Diversity & Inclusion)Tim Langlois, Research Fellow, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1029282018-09-10T11:48:12Z2018-09-10T11:48:12ZClimate change conflicts are here – and ‘scallop wars’ are just the beginning<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/235579/original/file-20180910-123116-1hrrhrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Stormy seas ahead.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/detail-stormy-sea-on-windy-day-628687130?src=WUFO0E16scBb81_NEZZ_lQ-1-1">Simona Dibitonto/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the planet warms, species are <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/fish-migrate-climate-change-north-seafood-fishermen-cod-sea-bass-king-crab-a8354861.html">moving further north</a> to climate zones which are closer in temperature to what they originally evolved in. The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/12/science/earth/ocean-warming-climate-change.html">oceans have absorbed</a> most of this temperature increase, and so many marine species, including commercially fished scallops, are under particular stress to migrate northwards to cooler waters. </p>
<p>In the face of this disruption, legal boundaries for fishing fleets could become increasingly irrelevant. As the fish stocks they once contained move out, conflict is likely to arise between countries exploiting neighbouring fishing grounds.</p>
<p>As a result, the ongoing “<a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45411941">scallop war</a>”, which has seen tense physical confrontations between French and British scallop fishers over access to these prized molluscs, may be a taste of worse to come.</p>
<h2>Shellfish behaviour</h2>
<p>The habitat ranges and migration patterns of commercial species in the ocean have been <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470693919.ch4">carefully studied throughout history</a>, so that fishing fleets can exploit them more efficiently. This understanding has informed the division of fishing grounds according to who has the right to harvest them.</p>
<p>French scallop fishers were incensed over their British counterparts’ alleged <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/scallop-wars-britain-france-fishing-rights-english-channel-history-a8512871.html">pillaging</a> of scallop stocks, as smaller British boats aren’t bound by a French law that prohibits dredging in the Baie de Seine from October 1 through May 15, to allow scallop populations to recover.</p>
<p>While on the surface it might seem that these skirmishes are anchored to specific circumstances – potentially inflamed by <a href="https://theconversation.com/scallop-wars-between-britain-and-france-are-just-a-pre-brexit-skirmish-102588">existing tensions around Brexit</a> – they highlight the enormous difficulties in clearly mapping and enforcing legal boundaries around natural habitats that are changing rapidly.</p>
<p>These disputes over resources such as food will become more frequent and intense as climate change alters the habitats and material conditions of life on Earth.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/scallop-wars-between-britain-and-france-are-just-a-pre-brexit-skirmish-102588">'Scallop wars' between Britain and France are just a pre-Brexit skirmish</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Fisheries in flux</h2>
<p>Managing marine resources like fish has always been tricky. Each species responds differently to changes and pressures in its environment, making it difficult for anyone to predict exactly where they will be, when or how far they will migrate, and how many remain. Climate change has introduced new uncertainty. </p>
<p>The effects of rising temperatures, though variable across species, have already begun to alter the <a href="https://phys.org/news/2018-03-world-affect-fish-size-fisheries.html">sizes</a>, <a href="http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/nhu/nhug10001.pdf">distribution</a>, and food web interactions of marine organisms. Warming seas have led to an overall <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3841453.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ae202c73ec0c05b8997b8aea43519dd28">northward movement</a> for many species, some at a pace of 2.2 kilometres per year. This includes commercial species such as the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/02/fish-conservation-foreign-species-uk-waters-climate-change">Atlantic cod</a>, a trend that is observable <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/333/6045/1024">among land-based animals</a> as well.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/235576/original/file-20180910-123128-1saiu62.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) populations are heavily exploited and under pressure to migrate northwards with climate change.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/atlantic-cod">NOAA Fisheries</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere means more of it dissolves in the ocean, making seawater more acidic. This process, known as <a href="https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/invertebrates/ocean-acidification">ocean acidification</a>, is making it difficult for species such as scallops to grow their tough calcium-carbonate shells, threatening their growth and survival. </p>
<p>On top of all of this, we’re taking from the ocean more than it can replenish. Currently <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/oceans/overfishing/">over 90%</a> of large commercial fish species such as tuna and cod have already been caught, and over 70% of the world’s fisheries range from “significantly depleted” to “fully exploited”. Species unable to adapt to this pressure are likely to decline or even disappear. </p>
<h2>Building bridges over troubled water</h2>
<p>If the scallop wars end soon, climate change will continue to disrupt marine ecosystems and render political boundaries increasingly outdated. We will need to have a radical rethink of who should have rights to what, who is to have the authority in managing important areas and resources, and what constitutes a truly sustainable harvest. </p>
<p>Greater communication and collaboration between fishers, policymakers, researchers and the wider public will become essential for navigating the troubled waters ahead. </p>
<p>Perhaps it is also time to take the interests of other species into consideration in this process, by viewing the natural world and non-human life as more than mere resources or a backdrop to the unfolding human drama.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102928/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Heather Alberro does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Confrontation between French and British scallop fishers is a warning about the resource conflicts of the future.Heather Alberro, Lecturer in Global Studies, Nottingham Trent UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1008202018-08-01T02:59:08Z2018-08-01T02:59:08ZNew map shows that only 13% of the oceans are still truly wild<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229921/original/file-20180731-176698-1vumezv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Predatory fish are among the most vulnerable species to human pressures.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rich Carey/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>HJust 13% of the world’s oceans are now free from intense human activities such as fishing, according to a new map of ocean wilderness areas.</p>
<p>Our research, <a href="https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(18)30772-3">published in the journal Current Biology</a>, shows that only 55 million square km of the global ocean can still be classified as “wilderness”, out of a total of 500 million square km. </p>
<p>There is almost no wilderness left in coastal seas, where human activities are most intense. Much of the remaining marine wilderness is clustered around the poles or near remote Pacific island nations with low populations.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229918/original/file-20180731-176698-214yjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=349&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Marine wilderness in exclusive economic zones (light blue), in areas outside national jurisdiction (dark blue), and marine protected areas (green).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Jones et al. Current Biology 2018</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Humans rely on the ocean for food, livelihoods, and almost <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11538-015-0126-0">three-quarters of atmospheric oxygen</a>. We use the ocean for the <a href="https://business.un.org/en/entities/13">vast majority of global trade</a>, and <a href="http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5555e.pdf">more than 2.8 billion people rely on seafood</a> as an important protein source. It’s little wonder that more than <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/1301.0Feature%20Article32004">eight in ten Australians live within 50km of the coast</a>.</p>
<p>Earth’s ocean wilderness areas are home to unparalleled levels of marine life and are some of the only places where large predators are still found in historical numbers. Top predators such as sharks and tuna depend on these areas, as their slow reproduction rates make them particularly <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011968">susceptible to decline even at mild levels of fishing</a>. </p>
<p>Even the strictest, best-managed marine reserves <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12000">cannot sustain the same levels of wildlife diversity</a> as wilderness areas. This is either because reserves are too small, or because human activities in neighbouring areas impact wildlife as soon as they swim outside of reserve boundaries. According to our research, only 4.9% of marine wilderness is currently within marine protected areas.</p>
<p>There is evidence that wilderness areas are <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0006324">more resilient to rising sea temperatures and coral bleaching</a> – stressors that cannot be halted without globally coordinated efforts to reduce emissions. These areas also give scientists a true baseline for system health, providing important information for restoring degraded marine ecosystems.</p>
<h2>Threats to wilderness</h2>
<p>Human impacts on marine ecosystems are becoming more intense and widespread
each year, threatening wilderness areas across the planet. Fishing is
now one of the most widespread activities by which humans harvest natural
resources. Industrial fishing covers 55% of the ocean, an area <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6378/904.full">four times larger than is used for terrestrial agriculture</a>. In many places, fishing has become so intense that large predators and charismatic species such as sea turtles have almost been wiped out.</p>
<p>Technological improvements have allowed humans to fish in the
<a href="http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/6/eaat2504.full">farthest reaches of international waters</a>. In the high Arctic, places that were once safe because of year-round ice cover are <a href="https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article/75/1/61/4080407">now open to fishing and shipping</a> as warming seas melt the ice.</p>
<p>Even in nations with world-class fisheries management, such as Australia and the
United States, marine environments are being severely impacted by sediment and
nutrient runoff due to poor land management and deforestation. Sediment runoff onto the once pristine Great Barrier Reef is now <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01361">five to ten times higher than historical levels</a>, contributing to <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X11006503">declining coral diversity and more frequent crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks</a>, and reducing the <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0006324">resilience of reefs</a> against climate change.</p>
<h2>Can we save the last of the wild?</h2>
<p>Marine wilderness is overlooked in both global and national conservation strategies, as these areas are often assumed to be free from threatening processes and are therefore not a priority for conservation efforts. Our results show that this is a myth – wilderness areas in the ocean and on land are <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-worlds-carbon-stores-are-going-up-in-smoke-with-vanishing-wilderness-65345">being rapidly lost</a>, and protecting what remains is crucial. The Arctic, once thought of as untouched, is now likely to see new shipping channels, fisheries, and mining operations as sea ice disappears.</p>
<p>Protecting wilderness will require a combination of national and international efforts, but the fundamental goal must be to curb the impacts of current threats such as commercial fishing, shipping, resource extraction, and land-based runoff.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yUYPSAhpqBA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In nations like Australia and Canada, which still have substantial wilderness remaining within their national waters, using marine protected areas or fishery management regulations to protect wilderness will be crucial. Because even low levels of human activity can <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12000">severely impact vulnerable species such as sharks and tuna</a>, these areas should be strictly protected and cannot allow activities like commercial fishing.</p>
<p>However, current government plans to <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-parks-plan-is-a-case-of-the-emperors-new-clothes-81391">almost halve the area of strict protection</a> in the Australian marine reserve system do not bode well for the future of wilderness protection.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-parks-plan-is-a-case-of-the-emperors-new-clothes-81391">Australia’s new marine parks plan is a case of the Emperor's new clothes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>While protecting wilderness within national waters is legally straightforward,
preserving wilderness on the high seas will likely prove much more challenging, as no country has jurisdiction over these areas. One option may be to harness existing international and regional agreements, such as <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/international/rfmo_en">Regional Fisheries Management Organisations</a> – international agencies formed by countries to manage shared fishing interests in a certain area. These organisations are already accustomed to set fishing limits, and have been used to close large areas of the high seas to <a href="https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management-Measures/2018-CMMs/CMM-03-2018-Bottom-Fishing-8March2018.pdf">damaging bottom-trawl fishing</a>. An extension of their powers to create high seas conservation areas is certainly feasible, but this is likely to require substantial lobbying from member nations.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-laws-for-the-high-seas-four-key-issues-the-un-talks-need-to-tackle-56298">New laws for the high seas: four key issues the UN talks need to tackle</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The need for improved high-seas management is also now being recognised by the international community, with the UN currently negotiating a “Paris Agreement for the Ocean” – a <a href="https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/12/un-high-seas-conservation-treaty-ocean-protection-spd/">legally binding high-seas conservation treaty</a> to be established under the existing Law of the Sea Convention. Australia, as a wealthy nation and a signatory to fishing agreements in the Pacific, Indian and Southern Oceans, has the potential to be a world leader in marine wilderness conservation if it so chooses.</p>
<p>Just like <a href="https://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(16)30993-9">wilderness on land</a>, pristine oceans are difficult to restore once lost. Our research should be a clarion call for immediate action to protect the world’s remaining wild oceans so that future generations can see the sea as it once was.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100820/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kendall Jones is affiliated with the Wildlife Conservation Society</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carissa Klein receives funding from the ARC.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hedley Grantham is affiliated with the Wildlife Conservation Society</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hugh Possingham receives funding from The Australian Research Council and the federal government National Environmental Science Program. He works for The University of Queensland and The Nature Conservancy (global)</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Watson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is Director of Science at the Wildlife Conservation Society. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alan Friedlander, Benjamin Halpern, Caitlin Kuempel, Nicole Shumway, and Oscar Venter do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The world has some 500 million square kilometres of ocean. But just 55 million square kilometres remain untouched by intensive human activities such as fishing.Kendall Jones, PhD candidate, Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of QueenslandAlan Friedlander, Researcher, University of HawaiiBenjamin Halpern, Professor, University of California, Santa BarbaraCaitlin Kuempel, PhD Candidate in Conservation Science, The University of QueenslandCarissa Klein, Postdoctoral research fellow in conservation biology, The University of QueenslandHedley Grantham, Research Associate, The University of QueenslandHugh Possingham, Professor, The University of QueenslandJames Watson, Professor, The University of QueenslandNicole Shumway, PhD Candidate, The University of QueenslandOscar Venter, Associate Professor and FRBC/West Fraser research chair, Ecosystem Science and Management Progam, University of Northern British ColumbiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/843662017-09-20T20:36:40Z2017-09-20T20:36:40ZMore than 1,200 scientists urge rethink on Australia’s marine park plans<p><em>The following is a statement from the <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/">Ocean Science Council of Australia</a>, an internationally recognised independent group of university-based Australian marine researchers, and signed by <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/OSCA-science-statement-2017_09_20.pdf">1,286 researchers from 45 countries and jurisdictions</a>, in response to the federal government’s <a href="https://parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/management/draft-plans">draft marine parks plans</a>.</em> </p>
<hr>
<p>We, the <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/OSCA-science-statement-2017_09_20.pdf">undersigned scientists</a>, are deeply concerned about the future of the Australian Marine Parks Network and the apparent abandoning of science-based policy by the Australian government.</p>
<p>On July 21, 2017, the Australian government released <a href="https://parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/management/draft-plans/">draft management plans</a> that recommend how the Marine Parks Network should be managed. These plans are deeply flawed from a science perspective.</p>
<p>Of particular concern to scientists is the government’s proposal to significantly reduce high-level or “no-take” protection (<a href="https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protected-areas-categories">Marine National Park Zone IUCN II</a>), replacing it with partial protection (<a href="https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protected-areas-categories">Habitat Protection Zone IUCN IV</a>), the benefits of which are at best modest but more generally have been shown to be inadequate.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-parks-plan-is-a-case-of-the-emperors-new-clothes-81391">Australia’s new marine parks plan is a case of the Emperor's new clothes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/marine/marine-reserves/overview/resources">2012 expansion of Australia’s Marine Parks Network</a> was a major step forward in the conservation of marine biodiversity, providing protection to habitats and ecological processes critical to marine life. However, there were flaws in the location of the parks and their planned protection levels, with barely 3% of the continental shelf, the area subject to greatest human use, afforded high-level protection status, and most of that of residual importance to biodiversity.</p>
<p>The government’s <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/marinereservesreview/home">2013 Review of the Australian Marine Parks Network</a> had the potential to address these flaws and strengthen protection. However, the draft management plans have proposed severe reductions in high-level protection of almost 400,000 square kilometres – that is, 46% of the high-level protection in the marine parks established in 2012. </p>
<p>Commercial fishing would be allowed in 80% of the waters within the marine parks, including activities assessed by the government’s own <a href="http://conservationgeography.org/content/fishing-gear-risk-assessments">risk assessments</a> as incompatible with conservation. Recreational fishing would occur in 97% of Commonwealth waters up to 100km from the coast, ignoring the <a href="relevant%20link%20from%20ref%20list%20would%20be%20good%20here">evidence</a> documenting the negative impacts of recreational fishing on biodiversity outcomes.</p>
<p>Under the draft plans:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The Coral Sea Marine Park, which links the iconic Great Barrier Reef Marine Park to the waters of New Caledonia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (also under consideration for protection), has had its Marine National Park Zones (IUCN II) reduced in area by approximately 53% (see map below)</p></li>
<li><p>Six of the largest marine parks have had the area of their Marine National Park Zones IUCN II reduced by between 42% and 73%</p></li>
<li><p>Two marine parks have been entirely stripped of any high-level protection, leaving 16 of the 44 marine parks created in 2012 without any form of Marine National Park IUCN II protection.</p></li>
</ul>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=266&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=266&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=266&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/179316/original/file-20170723-28478-1lc3sey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Proposed Coral Sea Marine Park zoning, as recommended by independent review (left) and in the new draft plan (right), showing the proposed expansion of partial protection (yellow) vs full protection (green).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">From http://www.environment.gov.au/marinereservesreview/reports and https://parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/management/draft-plans/</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The replacement of high-level protection with partial protection is not supported by science. The government’s own <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/marine/marine-reserves/overview/background#Social_and_economic_assessments">economic analyses</a> also indicate that such a reduction in protection offers little more than marginal economic benefits to a very small number of commercial fishery licence-holders.</p>
<h2>Retrograde step</h2>
<p>This retrograde step by Australia’s government is a matter of both national and international significance. Australia has been a world leader in marine conservation for decades, beginning with the establishment of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in the 1970s and its expanded protection in 2004. </p>
<p>At a time when oceans are under increasing pressure from overexploitation, climate change, industrialisation, and plastics and other forms of pollution, building resilience through highly protected Marine National Park IUCN II Zones is well supported by decades of science. This research documents how high-level protection conserves biodiversity, enhances fisheries and assists ecosystem recovery, serving as essential reference areas against which areas that are subject to human activity can be compared to assess impact.</p>
<p>The establishment of a strong backbone of high-level protection within Marine National Park Zones throughout Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone would be a scientifically based contribution to the protection of intact marine ecosystems globally. Such protection is consistent with the move by many countries, including Chile, France, Kiribati, New Zealand, Russia, the UK and US to establish very large no-take marine reserves. In stark contrast, the implementation of the government’s draft management plans would see Australia become the first nation to retreat on ocean protection.</p>
<p>Australia’s oceans are a global asset, spanning tropical, temperate and Antarctic waters. They support six of the seven known species of marine turtles and more than half of the world’s whale and dolphin species. Australia’s oceans are home to more than 20% of the world’s fish species and are a hotspot of marine endemism. By properly protecting them, Australia will be supporting the maintenance of our global ocean heritage. </p>
<p>The finalisation of the Marine Parks Network remains a remarkable opportunity for the Australian government to strengthen the levels of Marine National Park Zone IUCN II protection and to do so on the back of strong evidence. In contrast, implementation of the government’s retrograde draft management plans undermines ocean resilience and would allow damaging activities to proceed in the absence of proof of impact, ignoring the fact that a lack of evidence does not mean a lack of impact. These draft plans deny the science-based evidence.</p>
<p>We encourage the Australian government to increase the number and area of Marine National Park IUCN II Zones, building on the large body of science that supports such decision-making. This means achieving a target of at least 30% of each marine habitat in these zones, which is supported by Australian and international marine scientists and affirmed by the <a href="http://www.worldparkscongress.org/">2014 World Parks Congress</a> in Sydney and the IUCN Members Assembly at the <a href="https://www.iucn.org/about/world-conservation-congress">2016 World Conservation Congress</a> in Hawaii.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>You can read a fully referenced version of the science statement <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/statement/">here</a>, and see the list of signatories <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/OSCA-science-statement-2017_09_20.pdf">here</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84366/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jessica Meeuwig does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia’s reputation as a global leader in marine conservation is being put at risk by plans to strip back sanctuary areas within marine parks, say scientists from around the globe.Jessica Meeuwig, Professor & Director, Marine Futures Lab, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/645842016-08-31T02:15:55Z2016-08-31T02:15:55ZObama’s Hawaiian marine preserve: Massive potential, monumental challenges<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135980/original/image-20160830-28235-ufzhtr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The endangered Hawaiian monk seal is one of the 7,000 species that gained a measure of protection. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/usfwspacific/28950129892/in/album-72157624901836106/">U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Obama’s environmental record just went big. On August 26, he quadrupled the size of the <a href="http://www.papahanaumokuakea.gov/">Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument</a> in the center of the Pacific Ocean, northwest of Hawaii. Whatever other conservation actions he takes in his final months in office, Papahānaumokuākea will be hard to top.</p>
<p>The new monument is also outsized in the interrelated issues that it will address – and generate. In Papahānaumokuākea, biology, politics and policy converge and collide in revelatory ways. </p>
<p>For those of us who study the intersection of environmental history, policy and politics on sea and land <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Not-Golden-State-Sustainability-California/dp/1595347828">as I do</a>, it’s clear the creation of this gigantic marine monument is a huge step forward for conservation and for helping ecosystems adapt to a changing climate. </p>
<p>But it also poses such significant management, budgetary and political challenges that I fear Papahānaumokuākea will complicate, if not submarine, President Obama’s ambitious environmental agenda.</p>
<h2>Human and natural challenges</h2>
<p>To understand the challenges Papahānaumokuākea will pose, start with the site’s remoteness – it is a far remove even from the main Hawaiian Islands, never mind the West Coast. Add, then, its vastness: President Obama added more than 440,000 square miles to boost the already designated monument to a staggering 582,578 square miles. Note: These are square miles, not acres. So gigantic is this national monument that it is larger than all the U.S. national parks and national forests combined; it’s not much smaller than Alaska. </p>
<p>The conservation mission of Papahānaumokuākea, which is now the largest blue reserve on this blue planet, is also a tall order. Significantly, it <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/08/26/presidential-proclamation-papahanaumokuakea-marine-national-monument">prohibits fishing and other resource exploitation</a> so as to protect such endangered species as the short-tailed albatross and the remaining population of Hawaiian monk seals, as well as the long-living black coral (some of which are estimated to be 4,000 years old). So little of its flora and fauna have been studied that it is highly likely that the 7,000 species known to inhabit the region are but a fraction of those actually there. </p>
<p>Finally, the national monument comes with a social justice commitment: The state’s lead indigenous rights agency, the <a href="http://www.oha.org/">Department of Hawaiian Affairs</a>, will help supervise <a href="http://www.papahanaumokuakea.gov/">archaeological and sacred sites</a>, an innovative co-management initiative. By any calculation, Papahānaumokuākea is astonishing.</p>
<p>But it precisely the national monument’s massive proportions that make its effective management so daunting. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136004/original/image-20160830-26282-19vtpn2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=463&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The creation of the Papahanaumokuakea National Monument, which preserves important ocean resources, was enabled by Obama’s predecessor Bush and gained backing from Hawaii’s legislators.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.papahanaumokuakea.gov/">Papahanaumokuakea National Monument</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Consider that the first generation of forest rangers on the U.S. national forests had to control only one million acres in the remote western mountains, and yet understandably they were baffled how they and their horses could steward their new domain. Imagine their modern counterparts trying to survey a waterscape 100 times that extent, even with airplanes and satellites; Papahānaumokuākea dwarfs our faith in management by technology. </p>
<p>Now add budgetary constraints to the vastness of Papahānaumokuākea: The National Park Service’s funding has taken a hit recently at the same time that the number of properties it supervises has mushroomed, thanks to President Obama’s rapid-fire creation of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/opinion/sunday/obama-the-monument-maker.html?_r=0">26 new national monuments</a> (with even more anticipated). </p>
<p>I understand why the chief executive is moving with dispatch (a mash-up of legacy building and opportunity knocks). But I worry that the speed with which these sites have been designated, and their disparate fiscal demands, has outstripped the executive branch’s capacity to underwrite them. My worry is magnified given the <a href="https://morningconsult.com/2016/03/23/republican-cries-foul-on-possible-grand-canyon-monument/">strong opposition</a> in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to the president’s ready use of the Antiquities Act. </p>
<p>Papahānaumokuākea will be a major test of the federal government’s stewardship, then, not least because in the run-up to its expansion the National Park Service held a series of <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/08/obama-creates-world-s-largest-park-off-hawaii/">raucous public meetings</a> in which the industrial and longline fishing industry, along with native organizations, opposed the designation. </p>
<p>Preservation of marine life, they argued, is in direct competition with their long history of harvesting food from these very waters. How the National Park Service manages these fraught human dynamics will be every bit as critical as its stewardship of the marinescape’s threatened biodiversity.</p>
<h2>Building on Bush’s legacy</h2>
<p>At the same time, I am buoyed by the national monument’s oddly bipartisan political history: It owes existence to two very different presidents, one whose administration <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2003/sep/21/usnews.georgewbush">downplayed emerging climate change science</a>, the other who has been at the forefront of world leaders responding to the threats climate change poses.</p>
<p>In 2006, <a href="http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/pbs-documentary-by-jean-michel-cousteau-contributes-to-president-bushs-decision-to-name-new-national-monument-and-worlds-largest-protected-marine-area-june-15-2006/">after a White House screening</a> of Jacques-Michel Cousteau’s documentary “Voyage to Kure,” which details human damage to the islands’ ecosystems, President George W. Bush was moved to action. Using the 1906 Antiquities Act, he set aside Papahānaumokuākea – the first of four oceanic parks he would create in the Pacific. Time magazine dubbed this collection of sites Bush’s <a href="http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1869917,00.html">last acts</a> of “greenness,” while a legion of environmental critics suggested they were his first and last; no president had used the Antiquities Act less than Bush did. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136000/original/image-20160830-25615-1ik29uu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The creation of the monument is controversial with the fishing industry and indigenous groups who complain about new restrictions on fishing in the area.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/usfwspacific/5670974276/in/album-72157624901836106/">Lindsey Kramer/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Moreover, given how far away these sites were from the continental U.S., their very isolation dampened any controversy. Still, as Time magazine noted, these “marine monuments will mean that President Bush – perhaps the least environmental president in U.S. history – will have protected more of the ocean than anyone else in the world.”</p>
<p>President Obama has blown that claim out of the water. But he did so in a more calculated, less cathartic manner. As part of his <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-record/climate">2009 commitment to address climate change</a>, his administration has sought projects that would enhance landscape resilience to the effects of climate change.</p>
<p>In 2014, Obama added roughly 300,000 square miles to the Bush-inaugurated <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/25/presidential-proclamation-pacific-remote-islands-marine-national-monumen">Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument</a> (now totaling 490,343 square miles), a stretch of remote Pacific islands south and west of Hawaii. When he did so, he justified its expansion as a way to strengthen Pacific ecosystems. The same rationale was deployed in support of Papahānaumokuākea National Monument. </p>
<p>These two mega monuments, when combined with the 126 other (and smaller) U.S. marine sanctuaries, now account for about 26 percent of the nation’s waters, meaning that collectively they are giving oceanic species a fighting chance to survive as the climate-charged seas warm and rise. They also make the president’s latest action in the Pacific more than a grand gesture. It just might be a planetary life preserver.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64584/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Char Miller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument is huge win for preservation, but it also poses outsized management challenges for the National Park Service.Char Miller, W. M. Keck Professor of Environmental Analysis, Pomona CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/330922014-11-13T19:32:58Z2014-11-13T19:32:58ZMarine parks for fish and people: here’s how to do it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64445/original/py8bgbp5-1415849683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">NSW is considering a marine park for Sydney Harbour. But have we learnt from our past mistakes?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/hindmarsh/12197895894">Peter Hindmarsh</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As thousands gather for the World Parks Congress in Sydney, there are growing calls for a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/calls-for-sydney-marine-park-to-protect-remaining-habitat-20141111-11khse.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn%3Atwi-13omn1677-edtrl-other%3Annn-17%2F02%2F2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o%26sa%3DD%26usg%3DALhdy28zsr6qiq">new marine park</a> in Sydney Harbour. New South Wales’s Labor opposition has promised, if elected, <a href="http://lukefoley.com.au/labor-to-protect-sydney-harbour-for-enjoyment-of-future-generations-with-creation-of-a-sydney-marine-park">to establish the park</a>, and there is speculation the state government will announce its own plan at the congress. </p>
<p>But marine parks have <a href="https://theconversation.com/go-fish-why-fishers-dont-care-for-marine-parks-14558">proved controversial</a> in NSW, culminating in sanctuary zones (where fishing was banned) being <a href="https://theconversation.com/recreational-fishing-in-marine-parks-you-cant-be-serious-12785">opened to recreational fishers</a> last year. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the federal government is reviewing the management of Australia’s commonwealth marine parks. New management plans proposed under the previous Labor government have been suspended, effectively leaving a system of parks “<a href="https://theconversation.com/marine-park-review-looks-set-to-repeat-past-mistakes-32869">on paper</a>”, with little protection. </p>
<p>So how can we get marine parks right? </p>
<h2>Why fishers don’t like marine parks</h2>
<p>Allowing recreational fishing in sanctuary zones is the latest move in the <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aqc.2469/abstract">troubled history of NSW marine parks</a>. Since 2009 we’ve seen three reviews, marine parks transferred from the state environment department to primary industries, a moratorium on new marine parks, and disbanding of the Marine Park Authority.</p>
<p>There has also been a shift away from using marine parks to insure against potential future threats such as unforeseen changes in fishing technology and growing coastal populations (known as a “precautionary approach”) to justifying the need for marine parks by <a href="http://www.marine.nsw.gov.au/">assessing current threats and risks</a>. </p>
<p>What went wrong?</p>
<p>First, the success of marine parks is often judged on the proportion of parks set aside as “sanctuary” or “no-take” zones, where fishing is prohibited.</p>
<p>But there is no scientific agreement on just what this figure should be. Opponents of fishing bans argued that these targets were being used in places, such as beaches, where there a few if any known threats to biodiversity. They are also home to mostly migratory species, unlikely to benefit from fishing bans in small areas. </p>
<p>Second, people had negative experiences with marine parks. <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aqc.2363/abstract">In interviews</a> recreational, commercial and Indigenous fishers reported more inconvenience and less enjoyment, negative effects on livelihoods, lifestyle and well-being, and negative impacts on their practice of culture. This fuelled opposition to marine parks. </p>
<p>Instead of doing a dedicated <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X11001370">social impact assessments</a>, the government simply did consultations and public discussions. And economic forecasts didn’t capture the individual importance of particular traditions, places, food items, or cultural practises. </p>
<p>Third, the case against marine parks was led by a vocal minority, heavily <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569113002093">grounded in ideology and politics</a>. Community surveys reveal that the majority of coastal communities support bans on fishing in marine parks. But these views were likely discouraged by louder voices. </p>
<h2>What does the science say?</h2>
<p>Fishing bans are justified scientifically on protecting marine wildlife and ecosystems. But <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X12000413">some marine scientists</a> argue that this approach unfairly targets fishing as the major threat to marine biodiversity when, in fact, there are a range of threats and fishing can be managed to be ecologically sustainable. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64444/original/t969t9sb-1415846739.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Marine parks help to protect our native species, like these Southern Yellowtailed Scad in New South Wales.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pacificklaus/9640902375/in/photolist-fFW9oK-et3Mh-fPRFqG-6GqeuN-6GqbLs-6pbWdU-kPnirv-6Gm9nr-6Gmate-7Ggs9G-6Gm8Ae-egUieh-6GqdLU-kPnm2F-gQLjS6-kPmzUz-kPnjPR-6pbVZd-6GqcH3-6i57SA-6GmaaZ-6pbWkG-ipSiz-6GqcVy-6p7NdP-pvxGwd-asT1RU-puBac4-63exnx-4qoeQA-2Jsjp9-fQeqB2-8mxzUT-73xhBH-72ETZ5-invrW4-6ZtKf2-72ETVL-6ZxKum-i9RgRb-ifXqaC-ihdYUi-8AesUC-hNPjt-73BgFJ-6ZaTvA-7GcuYg-6p7N7n">Klaus Stiefel</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Marine parks were justified by evidence from other countries of the impacts of over-fishing, and evidence that, globally, <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7487/full/nature13022.html">no-take zones work</a>. But there was a lack of local NSW evidence. </p>
<p>Although the scrutiny was justified, it overshadowed debate about the other values of no-take zones:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Protecting critical habitats (such as spawning sites and sites important for threatened species) </p></li>
<li><p>Maintaining undisturbed reference sites for research, education, monitoring</p></li>
<li><p>Providing wilderness experiences. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Instead of justifying the need for marine parks for biodiversity conservation, many marine park proponents argued that banning fishing in some areas would lead to more fish for fishers in others. There was, however, little evidence for these benefits, and none from NSW.</p>
<h2>Where to from here?</h2>
<p>The past five years in NSW show that marine parks need both ecological justification (for the fish) and social acceptance (for the fishers) — also known as <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X14002371">social license</a>. </p>
<p>Here are four ways to make things better:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Assess the costs and benefits of marine parks: ecological, social and economic, all in one</p></li>
<li><p>Consult a range of views, not just the loud voices</p></li>
<li><p>Make marine parks not just about marine wildlife, but about fishing too. So a marine park could conserve a spawning area of a favourite local fish</p></li>
<li><p>Analyse the impact of only assessing current threats and risk, as opposed to potential future threats and risks such as growing coastal populations and urban spread.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>When thinking about new marine parks, we need to translate the scientific knowledge that we have into socially acceptable responses, and incorporate social, cultural and economic knowledge into the existing suite of biological knowledge. </p>
<p>We also need to get better at explaining how marine parks affect different people. This may ultimately mean being flexible and open minded about the best long term means of protection within marine parks. </p>
<p>But unless we do this, we will continue to see conflict in NSW’s and Australia’s marine parks.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/33092/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>William Gladstone has previously conducted research funded by the NSW Department of Primary Industries and is a memebr of the Temperate East Bioregional Advisory Panel to the current Commonwealth Marine Reserves Review.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Voyer has previously conducted research funded by the NSW Department of Primary
Industries and is currently employed on a research project funded by the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation.</span></em></p>As thousands gather for the World Parks Congress in Sydney, there are growing calls for a new marine park in Sydney Harbour. New South Wales’s Labor opposition has promised, if elected, to establish the…William Gladstone, Professor and Head of School of the Environment, University of Technology SydneyMichelle Voyer, Assistant researcher, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/291182014-07-14T05:07:33Z2014-07-14T05:07:33ZWe must rein in heavy fishing gear to allow the seas to recover<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53666/original/3wrgny9r-1405250772.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C88%2C1142%2C816&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A dragnet that captures too much marine life.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Krabbenkutter_Ivonne_Pellworm_P5242390jm.JPG">Joachim Müllerchen</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When the UK Environmental Audit Committee investigated the issue of protecting our marine environment last month, it concluded that there had been a <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environmental-audit-committee/news/marineprotectedareaspublication/">woeful lack of decisive action</a> from the government so far.</p>
<p>The committee, led by the MP for Stoke-on-Trent, Joan Walley, questioned the government’s commitment to introducing <a href="http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/mczmap">Marine Conservation Zones</a> after less than a quarter of the 127 sites recommended by independent project groups were designated as conservation areas. And even in those that were established, there are serious concerns remaining over the <a href="https://theconversation.com/marine-conservation-bid-upsets-everyone-it-aimed-to-please-21246">adequacy of the enforcement provisions</a> put in place. None of them, for example, ban the use of damaging fishing gear such as trawls and dredges, equipment that causes long-term damage to the sea bed and obliterates fish spawning areas.</p>
<p>And as an example of why that’s such an important omission, the paper we’ve published, a scientific study of commercial fishing catches in the English Channel over the past 90 years, <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0101506">reveals the true impact</a> that industrial fishing has had upon marine life.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=756&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=756&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=756&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=950&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=950&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53643/original/p2m59sxt-1405096106.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=950&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mansized Atlantic halibut once landed in the 19th century are rare as hen’s teeth these days.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fish landings from the Channel grew from 9,146 tonnes in 1920 to 50,924 tonnes in 1970, peaking at 177,793 tonnes in 1983 and stabilising around 130,000-150,000 tonnes over the last decade. In that time the amount of cod, haddock and hake dropped from 48% to just 4% of the catch. Sharks and rays fell from 34% of catch in 1920 to 6% in 2010.</p>
<p>There’s been a huge decline in what is called white fish, those species that live near the sea bed such as cod, ling, hake and haddock which are prized for their delicious flakes of white flesh. Fish such as halibut that can grow as big as a man, and the common skate have disappeared completely off the southern coast of England and northern France. </p>
<p>When we examine the footprint of mobile fishing gear, like <a href="http://www.fao.org/fishery/geartype/305/en">beam trawlers</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKqM3hXwcRs">scallop dredgers</a>, the reason is screamingly obvious – Britain’s sea bed is repeatedly gouged by tonnes of heavy fishing gear. It’s no wonder that the only fish left are tiddlers. Our supermarkets stock cod and haddock freighted in from Iceland and Norway, where fishing with trawls and dredges is banned in coastal waters because of the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/10/bottom-trawling-how-to-empty-the-seas">damage it does to the fishes’ spawning areas</a>. Most of the salmon, bass and bream we eat come from from fish farms, because we simply cannot catch enough of those species in UK waters to meet consumer demand.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53645/original/zd7tjssx-1405097042.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">English Channel landings 1920–2010, showing falling white fish catch (ICES data).</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0101506">Molfese, Beare, Hall-Spencer</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The ecological balance of the seas around us has changed dramatically. Intense fishing of the English Channel by fleets from all over Europe has wiped out stocks of larger fish, allowing commercially undesirable species – the cockroaches, rats and mice of the sea – to thrive. Perversely, business is booming for the scallop-dredging fleet since scallops have tough shells and thrive in heavily trawled areas. But most of this catch is destined for the export market – it seems crazy to export what we catch and import what we eat.</p>
<p>A common misconception, one that is perpetuated by fisheries ministers throughout the European Union, is that there are too many fishermen catching too few fish. The problem is quite the opposite: there are too few fishermen catching too many fish. Large vessels manned by a skeleton crew trawl up vast quantities of sea life, burning fuel that is subsidised by the tax payer.</p>
<p>I want to see harbours bustling with small fishing vessels catching delicious food in a sustainable manner. The only way to achieve that is to prevent widespread damaging activities. We know from our own research in south-west England that marine life soon recovers once the use of mobile gear <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13002121">is stopped in inshore waters</a>. If you dive in shallow waters off the Azores or Norway, where the seabed is left alone, the seabed is teeming with life, with small fish that grow up to become the fish that feed the offshore fishing industry and, ultimately, feed us.</p>
<p>As Walley concluded: “When a rare species or biodiverse stretch of sea bed is destroyed it may be lost forever. The government must therefore act on the best available evidence and base its decisions on new marine conservation zones on the precautionary principle, rather than demanding unobtainable evidence.”</p>
<p>The scientific evidence is in. Now is the time for the government to act. Setting aside areas where marine life can recover makes sense and is the right thing to do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/29118/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jason Hall-Spencer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When the UK Environmental Audit Committee investigated the issue of protecting our marine environment last month, it concluded that there had been a woeful lack of decisive action from the government so…Jason Hall-Spencer, Professor of Marine Biology, University of PlymouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/282262014-06-20T05:05:13Z2014-06-20T05:05:13ZUS-led summit is welcome news for the ocean, at last<p>As it had already been cancelled once, due to the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24343698">US government shut-down</a> last October, the latest developments in Iraq made it seem likely the <a href="http://ourocean.info/">Our Ocean conference</a>, organised by the US State Department, could be cancelled again. Or that US Secretary of State John Kerry would make brief introductory remarks, and then not be seen again, as is often the case when senior government ministers attend science conferences.</p>
<p>While he wasn’t present throughout, Kerry dominated the conference earlier this week in Washington DC. And the conviction of his <a href="http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/06/227692.htm">speeches</a> – given at the start and the end, and over lunch and dinner too, exhorting the world’s decision-makers not just to hear the science, but to act on it – gives rise to optimism.</p>
<p>The focus of discussions were three of the most serious problems that threaten the ocean: over-fishing, pollution and acidification. None is an intractable problem, given sufficient national and international political will. Improve fishery regulation and traceability, don’t throw rubbish in the sea, and at least make a start on changing energy policy to reduce – and eventually halt – the ecological impact of ocean uptake of CO<sub>2</sub>.</p>
<p>So was it a science conference at all? Not in the usual sense of researchers presenting information for discussion by fellow experts, with few others understanding more than the first couple of slides. It was made clear to those scientists invited to speak that communication was crucial: don’t assume any knowledge of the field, and construct a coherent and persuasive narrative in no more than five minutes. Only a few slides that included graphs were allowed, and they had to be explained in less than ten words. </p>
<p>Three UK experts were invited to speak: Richard Thompson on marine plastic litter, along with me and Carol Turley discussing ocean acidification. Carol explained the chemistry, scale and unprecedented speed of ocean acidification; I argued the need for more data, on a worldwide basis, to improve understanding, short-term forecasting and long-term projections: what you don’t measure, you can’t manage. The audience was made up of a very wide spectrum of decision-makers, including heads of state, ministers and other government representatives from around 80 countries, and 400 delegates from industry, charitable foundations, NGOs and UN bodies.</p>
<p>US President Barack Obama made his contribution to the conference on video, announcing by executive decree new regulations to counteract illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in US waters, and also the establishment of what is likely to be <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140617-obama-ocean-protection-marine-reserves-seafood-environment/">the world’s largest Marine Protected Area</a> in the Pacific.</p>
<p>A flurry of announcements and commitments followed. Leonardo diCaprio told the conference how he has always been inspired by the ocean, and <a href="http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/leonardo-dicaprio-donates-7-million-dollars-marine-care-projects-1578079.html">pledged an extra US$7m</a> for marine conservation projects. The President of Palau, Tommy Remengesau, announced that 80% of his country’s Exclusive Economic Zone, around 500,000km<sup>2</sup> would become a marine sanctuary, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-06/an-palau-declares-marine-sanctuary2c-bans-all-commerical-fishi/5241742">phasing out commercial fishing</a>. The Norwegian Foreign Minister, Børge Brende, said it was time to “stop re-arranging deckchairs on the Titanic”, and committed US$1 billion for climate change mitigation. </p>
<p>Proportional to population, the US equivalent spend to Norway’s would be US$68 billion. Kerry didn’t go that far, but did newly commit around US$10 million over the next three years for projects tackling ocean acidification, through <a href="http://oceanacidification.noaa.gov/">NOAA</a> and the <a href="http://www.iaea.org/ocean-acidification/page.php?page=2181">Ocean Acidification International Coordination Centre</a> in Monaco. Particular emphasis would be given to helping the development the <a href="http://www.goa-on.org/">Global Ocean Acidification Observing Network</a>, in partnership with other national governments, intergovernmental bodies and <a href="http://www.oceanfdn.org/">The Ocean Foundation</a>. Such support comes at a crucial time for the network, established just a year ago at an international workshop in St Andrews.</p>
<p>Unfortunately no UK government minister attended the conference, nor were any new UK national marine initiatives announced. Sir David King, the Foreign Office special representative for climate change, did however remind the conference that four years ago the UK established the world’s largest no-take marine protected area in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-chagos-islands-are-unique-and-worth-protecting-15179">waters of the British Indian Ocean Territory</a>, as well as a major reserve in the Southern Ocean, and pointed out the challenges in enforcing fishing bans.</p>
<p>Will the conference inspire the UK government to make more rapid progress on marine protection around Britain? According to Professor Callum Roberts, such progress is <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/17/england-marine-conservation-zones">badly needed</a>: few tangible benefits have yet been seen from Britain’s marine conservation zones. But let’s be optimistic. Sound travels faster and further in seawater than in air, so by now the good news arising from this conference should be known throughout the marine realm, with the possibility of even better news to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28226/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Phillip Williamson receives direct funding from the UK Natural Environment Research Council, and indirect support from Defra and DECC</span></em></p>As it had already been cancelled once, due to the US government shut-down last October, the latest developments in Iraq made it seem likely the Our Ocean conference, organised by the US State Department…Phil Williamson, Science Coordinator for NERC Ocean Acidification Research Programme, University of East AngliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/227282014-02-05T18:58:00Z2014-02-05T18:58:00ZMarine conservation efforts are failing to take five key steps<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/40814/original/fz4mn2fq-1391621885.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C10%2C1022%2C863&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Step away from the fish, with your beak in the air.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reemul</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some of the world’s most vulnerable marine habitats are being failed by the conservation orders put in place to protect them. As the Environmental Audit Committee meets to discuss how it will implement Marine Conservation Zones in the UK, it’s worth paying heed to the latest research into the effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas around the world.</p>
<p>The concept of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as part of marine conservation policy has been gaining traction with governments worldwide. MPAs may be thought of as underwater national parks – areas granted protections intended to maintain certain features or habitats in the face of the ever-increasing impact of humans. That marine conservation is on the political agenda at all is real progress – until very recently the complex ecosystems under the waves were out of sight, out of mind.</p>
<p>In response to first the <a href="http://www.cbd.int/convention/">Convention on Biological Diversity</a> of 1992 and subsequent legislation such as the <a href="http://rod.eionet.europa.eu/instruments/631">European Marine Strategy Framework Directive</a>, governments <a href="http://data.unep-wcmc.org/datasets/17">worldwide</a> have been designating MPAs, with widely varying degrees of protection. An MPA can be anything from a no-take zone where all forms of fishing or disturbance are banned, to an area with a name (and often supporting legislation) but no effective protection at all – dubbed a “paper park”.</p>
<p>Surveying more than 2,000 species of reef fish inside and outside MPAs in 40 countries, an international team found in a study <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13022.html">published this week</a> that marine fish populations inside many parks or reserves are generally no different to those found in fished areas.</p>
<h2>Five findings</h2>
<p>Unsurprisingly the effects varied in different parts of the world, but some important themes emerged. The success of an MPA in meeting conservation goals depends on five key features, and ideally at least four of these five criteria should be met: the MPA should be no-take, the regulations well-enforced, it should be long-established, large in area, and isolated in terms of habitat (an island, or an area of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-chagos-islands-are-unique-and-worth-protecting-15179">coastal reef bounded by sandy beaches</a> may be ideal).</p>
<p>Conversely, those that allow any form of fishing, are inadequately enforced or too small to encompass the natural range of the most vulnerable species, such as wide-ranging <a href="https://theconversation.com/sharks-and-rays-threatened-worldwide-overfishing-to-blame-22186">sharks</a>, will fail to provide adequate protection.</p>
<p>Clearly, age is something that takes time, the implication being that MPAs should be permanently designated rather than subject to political whims. The reason for this is that species recovery can take time, and remember, we have intensely fished our coasts and territorial seas for many, many years. Implementing protection on ecological time scales allows MPAs to become effective <a href="http://www.nationalparks.co.nz/Documents/science-and-technical/drds340entire.pdf">laboratories for research</a>. A long-term study recently showed that effective MPAs can help <a href="https://theconversation.com/marine-reserves-help-fish-resist-climate-change-invaders-20960">resist invasion</a> from species who are moving due to the effects of climate change.</p>
<p>In the UK, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/marine-conservation-zone-2013-designations">27 Marine Conservation Zones</a> (MCZs) were designated in November 2013. This represents a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/21/england-27-new-marine-conservation-zones">fraction</a> of the sites initially proposed, but these have been deferred pending the gathering of “further evidence”. </p>
<p>This is a wonderful obfuscation, as evidence for the effects of marine protection cannot be determined unless protection is implemented in the first place. Studies in no-take MPAs show that the time for fished species to respond to protection varies, and even taking out the effects of humans may have unexpected results as natural ecosystem processes return. Evidence from UK waters may be poor, but there is ample information available from the rest of the world to provide a guide for the best way to build a biologically functional MPA.</p>
<h2>Measuring success</h2>
<p>It’s not always clear what the goals of Britain’s protected zones are. This is not a trivial issue, because the objectives provide a framework for measuring the success or otherwise of protection measures. The UK’s Science Advisory Panel <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69451/sap-mcz-final-report.pdf">has struggled</a> with vague definitions of objectives to “maintain” and “recover” marine habitats. A few zones do have more specific goals: at Lundy (a pre-existing no-take zone), the protection of rock lobster is explicitly stated by <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukmo/2013/12/created">Ministerial Order</a>. But are the zones boundaries set to encompass the range of lobster movement and thus allow numbers to build? Will fishing be eliminated?</p>
<p>Under the current framework, the way that MCZs are regulated is not explicitly stated anywhere. Areas endowed with maximum protection are called “reference areas”. On Natural England’s <a href="http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/1721481">MCZ Factsheets</a>, reference areas are not mentioned, permitted activities are licensed via the <a href="http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/">Marine Management Organisation</a>, or are made on a “case-by case basis” by local authorities.</p>
<p>And so, this looks a lot less like a protected area, and a lot more like business as usual. The UK’s MCZ’s are not no-take (<a href="http://www.lundymcz.org.uk/conserve/zoning-scheme">Lundy</a> excepted), they are mostly not very large, and most fall on continuous habitat. The degree of enforcement remains to be seen, but if there are effectively no restrictions on current activities, what enforcement is required?</p>
<p>So is the current and proposed network of protected zones in the UK nothing but a series of paper parks? Some <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2012/may/10/uk-marine-reserves">would say so</a>. The challenge to conservation planners, in Britain and elsewhere, is to build a series of protected areas that fulfil the criteria for successful conservation. It would help to have clearly stated biological goals for these parks that would provide a basis for their location and design. But so far, the consultation process appears to try to please and provide for everybody – except the marine environment itself.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/22728/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Trevor Willis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Some of the world’s most vulnerable marine habitats are being failed by the conservation orders put in place to protect them. As the Environmental Audit Committee meets to discuss how it will implement…Trevor Willis, Senior Lecturer in Marine Biology, University of PortsmouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.