tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/marine-reserves-series-31721/articlesMarine reserves series – The Conversation2016-10-27T19:09:09Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/652242016-10-27T19:09:09Z2016-10-27T19:09:09ZChanges to Australia’s marine reserves leave our oceans unprotected<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143412/original/image-20161027-11239-15k8nbo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Marlin are one of the prized fish in Australia's oceans. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marlin image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ocean health relies on a strong backbone of protection and management. Marine reserves can be part of the solution, but only if they’re constructed in the right way. <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/marinereservesreview/home">Recent recommendations on Australia’s marine reserves</a> would leave more ocean unprotected. </p>
<p>Marine reserves are a mix of multiple-use zones that allow activities such as mining and fishing, and highly-protected zones called marine national parks that are free of extractive activities. These marine national parks are the gold standard for protecting our oceans. Globally, <a href="http://www.mpatlas.org/">less than 1%</a> of the world’s oceans are fully protected in no-take marine national parks or their equivalents. </p>
<p>Australia is currently deciding how much of its ocean territory it will place in marine national parks and where. To this end, the government recently released its <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/marinereservesreview/home">commissioned review</a> of Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network. </p>
<p>Such a review is welcome as Australia has yet to provide <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/ef577ee6-e36e-4435-adf9-cbb5600728a3/files/nrsmpa-principles.pdf">comprehensive, adequate and representative</a> protection for its oceans. This is despite the general recognition within the Australian community that <a href="http://www.marinescience.net.au/blue-economy/">economic growth</a> depends on a healthy and properly functioning environment.</p>
<p>Marine national parks play a fundamental role in contributing to ocean ecosystem function and provide a means to assess the health of areas outside of these zones that are open to greater use by humans.</p>
<p>This understanding of the interdependence of how we protect and sustainably use our oceans is, unfortunately, largely missing from the review’s recommendations.</p>
<h2>The gold standard</h2>
<p>In early 2016 the <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/">Ocean Science Council of Australia</a> (OSCA) prepared a <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/OSCA-CMR-Review-2016_02_04-FINAL.pdf">scientific analysis</a> aimed at helping define what Australia’s marine reserves should deliver. </p>
<p>Based on hundreds of peer-reviewed publications and myriad international consensus statements from researchers on the need for strong ocean protection, the Council concluded that science-based decisions and actions should:</p>
<p>(1) Prevent fishing, mining and other extractive activities on at least 30% of each marine habitat, according to the <a href="https://portals.iucn.org/congress/motion/053">international standard for ocean protection</a> to deliver protection of both biodiversity and ecosystem services</p>
<p>(2) Improve representation of marine national parks in bioregions (regions of the ocean defined by particular species and climate) and <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/sprat-public/action/kef/search">key ecological features</a> (such as the continental shelf and offshore reefs) that were already under-represented in the 2012 marine reserve plans</p>
<p>(3) Build and maintain large, contiguous, highly-protected marine national parks in regions such as the Coral Sea</p>
<p>(4) Quantify the benefits of Australia’s marine reserves so as to make their value to Australia clearer.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143408/original/image-20161027-11256-1pafgts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=542&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">We need to monitor and study our ocean ecosystems to understand how they work.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">David Booth</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What the review says</h2>
<p>The government review reflects science and community concerns in some respects, recommending for instance that more bioregions have at least one marine national park. This review also recommends more protection for some important coral reefs and there is an expansion of protection from mining in some areas.</p>
<p>Most importantly, the review recognises the fundamental role of highly-protected marine national park zones in the conservation of species and ecosystems. As a corollary of this, the review also recognises that “partial protection” zones within reserves are primarily used to address narrow sector-based concerns such as fishing, and result in reduced conservation outcomes (as reviewed <a href="http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v367/p49-56/">here</a> and <a href="https://environmentalevidencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2047-2382-2-4">here</a>). </p>
<p>It requires explanation therefore that the review mostly fails to recommend zoning changes consistent with its own findings on the science. In comparison with the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/fed/catalog/search/resource/details.page?uuid=%7B2E8DD19C-1B93-4D90-BD1C-128DDC4A2998%7D">2013 recommended zoning</a>, the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/fed/catalog/search/resource/details.page?uuid=%7B9A273DA2-9D3A-49F8-A158-A1A9A319C505%7D">review’s recommended zoning</a> would: </p>
<p>(1) Remove a total of 127,000 square kilometres of marine national park from the overall network, an area 1.9 times the size of Tasmania, with a net loss of 76,000 sq km</p>
<p>(2) Reduce by 25% the contiguous Coral Sea marine national park</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142856/original/image-20161024-26504-r42j87.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=534&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Changes to Coral Sea marine national park proposed by review. Map generated from shape files provided by the Department of the Environment.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>(3) Demote 18 areas from marine national park zones to varying forms of partial protection</p>
<p>(4) Shift the location of some marine national parks from the continental shelf to offshore areas as a way of maintaining cover but further eroding representation and indeed reducing protection on the shelf where it is most needed. </p>
<p>Overall, the review’s recommendations would see only approximately 13% of Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone protected in marine national parks. This falls well below the recommended international standard of at least 30% of habitats being under <a href="https://portals.iucn.org/congress/motion/053">high protection</a>, or indeed higher levels as recently <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12247/full">determined</a>.</p>
<h2>Smoke and mirrors</h2>
<p>The recommendations in the review are tainted by a feeling of smoke and mirrors. While some of the review’s authors suggest that their recommendations would <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-story-behind-australias-marine-reserves-and-how-we-should-change-them-65220">increase protection</a>, there would indeed be a net loss of highly-protected zones should these recommendations be adopted by the government. </p>
<p>Under the review’s recommendations, Australia would do a great job of protecting the deep water abyss, but achieve little to protect ocean wildlife on the continental shelf where human pressures are highest. This out-of-sight-out-of-mind approach does not address the principles of marine conservation and also departs from recommendations from the research community.</p>
<p>Australian marine national parks are too-often relegated to <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-marine-protected-areas-why-they-wont-work-11469">residual areas</a> of relatively little conservation value simply because these areas are of little value to commercial interests.</p>
<p>The significant erosion of protection in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-coral-sea-an-ocean-jewel-that-needs-more-protection-65219">Coral Sea</a> is further evidence of this failure. Much of the erosion of this important reserve reflects a shift from full protection to partial protection in order to open up more ocean to tuna fishing. </p>
<p>The 25% reduction in large marine national park would increase tuna catch and value by 8-10% across the fishery, worth a mere <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/commercial-fishing-displacement-panel-recommended-zoning-scheme-abares.pdf">A$26,376</a> to individual tuna fishers. This recommendation fails both the science and the economic test. </p>
<h2>Where to from here?</h2>
<p>The changes recommended by the review in many cases appear to prioritise economic benefits, no matter how trivial, over conservation. This is despite conservation being the core reason behind the marine reserves.</p>
<p>This stands in stark contrast to international moves towards protection of large areas of the ocean as a response to ongoing declines in ocean health. </p>
<p>Key examples of such large-scale protection are US President Barack Obama’s recent expansion of the <a href="http://www.papahanaumokuakea.gov/">Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument</a> over the North West Hawaiian Islands and New Zealand Prime Minister John Key’s declaration of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/29/new-zealands-new-ocean-sanctuary-will-be-one-of-worlds-largest-protected-areas">Kermadec Marine Sanctuary</a> in New Zealand’s waters.</p>
<p>Australia still has a major opportunity to protect and secure its marine ecosystems and make a significant contribution to global ocean conservation. At the same time we can develop important economic activities such as fishing and mining. Large and well-managed areas are going to become more important, not less, as climate change intensifies. </p>
<p>This will require the federal government to acknowledge and build on the global body of science and create a backbone of representative marine national parks. This will include retention of the Coral Sea’s high level protection and resisting the temptation to shift of marine national parks offshore. At a time of great environmental change, these moves are not just important, but urgent.</p>
<p><em>This is a contribution from the <a href="http://oceansciencecouncil.org/">Ocean Science Council of Australia</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65224/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jessica Meeuwig receives funding from a range of government and philanthropic organisations to support primary research on the state of our oceans and their response to management. She is a member of the Ocean Science Council of Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Craig Johnson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and several other research providers to work on elucidating and predicting marine ecosystem dynamics, how these dynamics are influenced by human activity, and the spatial distribution of marine species and diversity. He works at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) at the University of Tasmania, and is a member of the Ocean Sciences Council of Australia (OSCA).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Booth is affiliated with the Australian coral Reef Society and OSCA. He has received funding from the Australia Research Council for research into coral and fish dynamics on the Great Barrier Reef.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Professor Hoegh-Guldberg undertakes research on coral reef ecosystems and their response to rapid environmental change, which is supported primarily by the Australian Research Council (Canberra), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Washington, D.C.), Catlin Group (London), and Great Barrier Reef Foundation (Brisbane). He not receive salary for writing this article.</span></em></p>Australia’s oceans would be less protected under recent recommendations.Jessica Meeuwig, Professor & Director, Centre for Marine Futures, The University of Western AustraliaCraig Johnson, Professor, University of TasmaniaDavid Booth, Professor of Marine Ecology, University of Technology SydneyOve Hoegh-Guldberg, Director, Global Change Institute, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/670532016-10-19T04:07:14Z2016-10-19T04:07:14ZFishing is worth more than jobs and profits to Australia’s coastal towns<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142280/original/image-20161019-20316-1p1449l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Fishing is a vital part of Australia's coastal towns. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marcia Phillip</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Many of the iconic coastal villages of Australia have a close association with professional fishing. In New South Wales, towns up and down the coast historically supported fishing fleets which supplied the seafood needs of locals, Sydney and the broader state community. </p>
<p>But the NSW fishing industry has changed significantly in the past 30 years, in response to a range of environmental and community concerns. People are more worried about the number of fish, habitat impacts, and how access to fish should be allocated.</p>
<p>There have been changes and restrictions on licences and fishing gear, quotas for some species and fisheries, and a substantial reduction in fishing areas through the expansion of marine parks and the creation of recreational fishing havens (where all professional fishing is banned). The number of current fishing licences in NSW is just a quarter of what it was during the industry’s peak in the 1970s and ‘80s. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=438&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142125/original/image-20161018-12416-tqff2c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=551&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Estimated NSW fishing licence holders 1881-2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wilkinson, 2013, Wilkinson, 1997 and NSW Department of Primary Industries</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The industry is currently going through <a href="http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing/commercial/reform">more management changes</a> and an expansion of existing <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-story-behind-australias-marine-reserves-and-how-we-should-change-them-65220">marine reserves into Commonwealth waters</a>.</p>
<p>There will be more challenges in the future. As populations grow, there will be more competition for resources, and <a href="http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/pittwater-residents-close-to-ending-commercial-netting">pressure from recreational fishers</a> to close more of the ocean to professional fishing. Similar campaigns in <a href="https://www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/fisheries/commercial-fishing/net-free-zones">Queensland</a> and <a href="http://agriculture.vic.gov.au/fisheries/recreational-fishing/target-one-million">Victoria</a> have prompted changes to the professional fishing industry, with unknown <a href="https://blogs.deakin.edu.au/anthropology/2015/07/23/anthropologist-tanya-king-comments-on-the-netting-ban-in-corio-bay/">impacts on local communities</a>. This has led to serious concerns about the ongoing viability of the industry in some regional centres. </p>
<h2>How much is fishing worth?</h2>
<p>We recently carried out a <a href="http://www.uts.edu.au/valuing-coastal-fisheries">two-year assessment</a> of the ways professional fishing contributes to the social and economic lives of NSW coastal communities. We assessed how the industry contributes to seven key dimensions of community well-being. </p>
<p>We traversed the NSW coast speaking to the breadth of the community, through interviews and surveys. We found that the industry remains a vital ingredient for maintaining the economic, social and cultural richness of coastal communities. </p>
<p>In particular our approach highlighted the importance of considering both social and economic factors, and the interdependence between sectors, when judging the value of professional fishing to communities. </p>
<p>The economic assessment revealed that the industry contributes more than A$436 million in revenue annually to the NSW economy and accounts for about 3,290 full-time jobs. This includes the fishers, service industries, sales and marketing.</p>
<p>This is a significant increase over previous estimates of the industry’s value, which did not include the “flow on” economic impacts to other businesses that rely on the fishing industry. These contributions are especially valued in smaller, regional communities where fishing still plays a central role in local economies.</p>
<p>For instance, Kari Esplin, secretary of the Eden Chamber of Commerce and a local business owner, told us:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Economically I see the fishing industry as a baseline in our community … it’s something that’s been there for a hundred years providing a steady economic benefit to the town and the region … It also has the benefit of being a sustainable fishery, not only from the point of view of its fishing practices, but also from a family point of view. So it’s the type of business that can be handed down through families if they choose, which builds a sense of tradition in the town, and also gives those families a feeling of self-worth that they’re a second, third or even fifth generation family business.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Looking beyond economic data gave us an insight into role the industry plays in other areas of community life. Professional fishers, for example, regularly participate in search and rescue. </p>
<p>Seafood is central to many cultural celebrations such as Christmas and the Lunar New Year. And fishing and long standing fishing families are part of the cultural heritage of many communities.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142281/original/image-20161019-20308-h7szs3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Hauling fish in the 1950s.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Seafood tourism</h2>
<p>The research also revealed sometimes hidden or unrecognised relationships between different sectors. In particular, professional fishing and tourism support and sustain each other in NSW coastal communities. </p>
<p>We found that 89% of NSW residents expect to eat local seafood when they visit the coast and 64% indicated they would be interested in watching professional fishers at work while on holidays. </p>
<p>Grahame Lewis, the Nelson Bay Co-Op manager, told us: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>People love watching – they come down and watch the boats unload, they see what sort of fish are coming in, they see it getting wheeled over to the shops and they know there’s stuff going in there from the local fishermen. It’s a drawcard really. People love going to seaside ports and just watching – not only here but everywhere along the coast.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Recreational fishers were much more likely to be interested in both buying fish from local professional fishers and watching professional fishing. This seems at odds with the messages of conflict between recreational and professional fishers commonly seen in public debate. Likewise 78% of recreational fishers across the state prefer bait caught by NSW professional fishers.</p>
<p>Professional fishing is also economically and culturally important in many coastal Indigenous communities. Indigenous fishers have a long history in the industry. Fishing still plays an important role in providing income, employment, a nutritious food source, independence and pride. This extends into the broader Indigenous community with fishers sharing a proportion of the catch and important cultural knowledge with kin. </p>
<p>Efforts to improve the environmental sustainability of the industry have been largely successful, and this is continuing to improve. Studies like ours give us an insight into how we can also ensure the economic and social sustainability of the industry, given its integral role in many coastal communities. </p>
<p>Nearly all (94%) of NSW coastal residents believe the fishing industry should be maintained in NSW. Our research gives us insights into how we can achieve this. And what we stand to lose if we don’t get it right. </p>
<p><em>This article was also co-authored by Nicole Mazur, visiting fellow in the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67053/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Voyer has been involved in a number of projects that have received funding from the Commonwealth Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, the NSW Recreational Fishing Trust and the NSW Department of Primary Industries. This project was funded by the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alistair McIlgorm has received funding from The Commonwealth Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and The Department of Primary Industries, NSW for commercial and recreational fishing research. He is Director of Dominion Consulting Pty Ltd. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Barclay receives funding from the Australian Commonwealth Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. She has previously received research funding from a range of organizations including Greenpeace, TRAFFIC, the World Bank, the European Parliament Committee on Fisheries and the United Nations Development Programme. She is affiliated with the International Pole and Line Foundation. </span></em></p>Many of the iconic coastal villages of Australia have a close association with professional fishing.Michelle Voyer, Postdoctoral research fellow, University of WollongongAlistair McIlgorm, Professor of Marine Economics, University of WollongongKate Barclay, Associate professor, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/652192016-10-05T19:16:38Z2016-10-05T19:16:38ZThe Coral Sea: an ocean jewel that needs more protection<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140460/original/image-20161005-14208-1o63xy1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A booby family on a sandy cay in the Coral Sea</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniela Ceccarelli</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The federal government is considering changes to Australia’s marine reserves to implement a national system. This week The Conversation is looking at the science behind marine reserves and how to protect our oceans.</em></p>
<p>Off Australia’s northeastern coastline, extending eastwards from the outer edge of the Great Barrier Reef, is a vast extent of ocean known as <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124080966000043">the Coral Sea</a>.</p>
<p>Almost a million square kilometres of the Coral Sea is within Australian waters, making up one of six regions used for planning national networks of marine reserves. Unlike the other regions, virtually all of the Coral Sea is within <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/topics/marine/marine-reserves/coral-sea">a single reserve</a>. </p>
<p>On the face of it, this should encourage people who are concerned with conservation of marine biodiversity. But, as often happens, the devil is in the detail. </p>
<p>The effectiveness of the reserve hinges on its internal zones – subdivisions that vary in the uses and activities they allow. So “protected” is a slippery concept. Just how protected the Coral Sea is depends on where and how large the different zones are. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/review/reports.html">review of Commonwealth marine reserves</a>, released earlier this month, recommended changes to the zoning arrangements put in place when the network was declared in 2012, but not for the better.</p>
<h2>A world-class sea</h2>
<p>The Coral Sea is almost entirely open ocean, reaching depths of more than 4,000m. Scattered through this expanse of deep blue are important patches of coral and rock: cays and islets, 30 atoll systems with shallow-water and <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00338-011-0725-7?LI=true">low-light coral reefs</a>, and <a href="http://deepreef.org/images/stories/publications/conference-proceedings/ColdwaterCoralGBR_Deepsea2008.pdf">seamounts and pinnacles</a> supporting <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12526-015-0434-5">deep-sea</a>, cold-water ecosystems.</p>
<p>The global significance of the Coral Sea for marine biodiversity – including corals, fish, turtles, seabirds, and whales - has been <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124080966000043">reviewed recently</a>, but new discoveries continue. </p>
<p>Recent exploration of the <a href="http://www.palaeontologie.geo.uni-muenchen.de/DDU/">deep slopes</a> of Coral Sea atolls has found unique and previously undocumented biodiversity, such as <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00338-011-0802-y?LI=true">precious corals and glass sponges</a>. Many of these species are “<a href="http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/news/2016/01/secrets-of-the-coral-sea-revealed">living fossils</a>”, now restricted to the deep, dark waters of the Coral Sea. </p>
<p>The southern Coral Sea is also a <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/100/17/9884.short">global hotspot for predators</a>. The protection of large predatory species such as sharks and marlin is particularly important, given their key roles in open ocean ecosystems and the <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v423/n6937/abs/nature01610.html">massive worldwide decline</a> of these animals at the hands of industrialised fishing.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140461/original/image-20161005-14243-asu3d4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=460&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 Coral Sea is a global hotspot for marine predators.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniela Ceccarelli</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Coral Sea’s remoteness does not make it immune from human impacts. Some fishing methods alter the structure and composition of seabed ecosystems. <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X14003546">Globally</a> and in <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ETBF-ERM-Feb-2012.pdf">eastern Australia</a>, pelagic long-lining takes a large toll in bycatch (non-target fish that are discarded, often dead, including shark species listed as vulnerable). </p>
<p>Many reefs in the Coral Sea are open to line fishing, which is known to <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/43/18278.full?sid=ac4f4508-e4e9-45d4-8496-945ca17c119a">deplete target populations</a> and adversely affect <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/14-1952.1/full">corals</a> in the neighbouring Great Barrier Reef. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/2016-coral-bleaching-event-26991">2016 coral bleaching event</a> that affected 93% of the Great Barrier Reef also caused significant death on reefs in the northern and central Coral Sea.</p>
<p>The importance and vulnerability of the Coral Sea call for well-planned protection. That protection should also be precautionary - where impacts are unknown or uncertain we should increase protection, or at least not put marine ecosystems at risk. This is one of the explicit principles of marine planning in Australia. </p>
<p>Commercial and recreational fishing present ecological risks that need to be managed carefully. Precaution is also called for because most parts of the Coral Sea, even those in relatively shallow water, are still largely unexplored, with the discovery of new species likely.</p>
<h2>The Coral Sea reserve</h2>
<p>In November 2012, the Labor federal government announced massive increases to Australia’s marine reserves, including large additions to existing smaller reserves in the Coral Sea. The zoning of the Coral Sea Marine Reserve that resulted was typical of the larger picture. </p>
<p>Zones that prohibited fishing (“no-take” zones, shown in green in the left-hand map below) were mostly far offshore in very deep waters where little or no fishing occurred.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140436/original/image-20161005-15889-x3x1g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=397&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 Coral Sea zones as established (left) and recommended by the review (right)</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Zones that protected the marine environment from open ocean long-lining were placed in areas where <a href="http://www.colinhunt.com.au/files/9413/8246/9841/Published_article_saved_pdf.pdf">little or no long-lining</a> occurred. Most reefs, cays and seamounts remained open to fishing. So did the world’s only known black marlin spawning aggregation. </p>
<p>Overall, the no-take zones were strongly “<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aqc.2445/full">residual</a>” – placed in areas left over from commercial and recreational uses, and least in need of protection – rather than designed to mitigate known threats. </p>
<p>The approach could be described as “business as usual”, with priority given to existing uses and conservation coming a poor second.</p>
<h2>The Coral Sea reserve, take two</h2>
<p>Following a backlash against the new marine reserves by <a href="http://theconversation.com/government-review-supports-australias-marine-reserves-now-its-time-to-move-on-64884">commercial and recreational fishing interests</a> the then opposition leader Tony Abbott fished for votes by promising to review the reserves. </p>
<p>Just over a year after they were established, the new reserves were “re-proclaimed” by the Coalition government, effectively rendering them empty outlines on the map. The strength of the <a href="http://saveourmarinelife.org.au/resources/fact-sheet-coral-sea-mythbuster-2/">pushback</a> against the reserves was perplexing, given that they were obviously designed to have <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aqc.2445/full">minimal effect on fishing</a> and no effect on extraction of oil and gas.</p>
<p>Before the release of <a href="http://www.parksaustralia.gov.au/marine/review/reports.html">the review</a>, a cynic might have predicted, given <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/26/marine-life-fishing-coalition-review">statements</a> when the review began, that the process was intended to convert a largely residual reserve system into a completely residual one. As it happens, that is close to what has been recommended for the Coral Sea.</p>
<p>A major feature of the recommended zoning is a reduction of no-take by more than 93,000km², or 9.3% of the Coral Sea Marine Reserve (no-take zones, or national park, now cover 40% of the reserve). No-take zoning is now even more strongly concentrated in remote, deep water where it will make even less difference to fishing than before. </p>
<p>The panel recommended new no-take zones in areas next to those in the central and southern Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, but large parts of the same region in the Coral Sea are proposed to be reopened to demersal trawling.</p>
<p>Some reefs have less protection than before, and some have more. Notably, two of the most <a href="http://www.hsi.org.au/editor/assets/marine_conservation/082011%20Australias%20Coral%20Sea_%20A%20Biophysical%20Profile%20by%20marine%20ecologist%20Dr%20%20Daniela%20Ceccarelli.pdf">important reefs</a> in the Coral Sea – Osprey and Marion – are partly open to fishing and partly no-take. Split zones are known to pose <a href="https://mcbi.marine-conservation.org/publications/pub_pdfs/Day_2002.pdf">problems for compliance</a> and are typically avoided in conservation planning. Fishing on Osprey could also compromise its value as a globally significant dive destination, specifically for its sharks and pelagic fish.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140463/original/image-20161005-14208-4eal7s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A giant trevally in the Coral Sea.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniela Ceccarelli</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are net increases in areas open to gear types known to pose ecological risks: sea floor longlines (2,400km² of the reserve, including the Fraser Seamount), sea floor trawl (26,300km²), and open sea long-lining (269,000km²). These changes appear inconsistent with advice on ecological risks. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/cmrreviewbioregionaladvisorypanelreportfinalchapter45.pdf">Bioregional Advisory Panel for the Coral Sea</a> found that seafloor long-lining is incompatible with the conservation values of the Coral Sea Marine Reserve, particularly on seamounts. </p>
<p>Two target species for open sea long-lining are either <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/fisheries/eastern-tuna-and-billfish-fishery-page/">overfished or at risk of overfishing</a>, and this fishery poses a <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ETBF-ERM-Feb-2012.pdf">high risk</a> for whales, sharks, and turtles.</p>
<p>When evidence was limiting, it appears that the Expert Scientific Panel placed the burden of proof on the environment, not on commercial and recreational users. </p>
<h2>Protecting the Coral Sea from what?</h2>
<p>Protected areas are meant to protect biodiversity from threats to its survival. Why bother saying that? </p>
<p>Because the 2012 marine reserves made almost no difference to activities threatening marine biodiversity. There is a key difference between protection, which stops threats from affecting species and ecosystems, and re-badging large tracts of ocean in ways that make no difference. </p>
<p>At least for the Coral Sea, the proposed new zones involve further re-badging but less overall protection. A similar mentality appears to underlie both the 2012 and recommended zonings: marine protected areas are good things to have, providing they don’t get in the way of socioeconomic interests.</p>
<p>While the new zones largely failed to protect the Coral Sea’s biodiversity, the review’s <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/cmrreviewexpertscientificpanelreportfinal.pdf">Expert Scientific Panel</a> favourably assessed the “performance” of the Coral Sea Marine Reserve in ways that are simply uninformative and distracting. </p>
<p>For instance, one of the measures used by the review is the number of conservation features (such as seafloor types) in reserves. This measure is misleading in three ways: many of the represented features don’t need protection, others are affected to varying, but unstated, degrees by fishing, and we don’t know how much of each feature needs protection.</p>
<p>At the core of systematic conservation planning, which is widely accepted as the most effective way of designing reserve systems, are <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6783/full/405243a0.html">quantitative objectives</a> for features, preferably reflecting ecosystem structure and function, scaled to reflect <a href="http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/abstract/S0169-5347(07)00280-7">levels of threat</a>. But these objectives were notably absent from the assessment of performance of the Coral Sea Marine Reserve, and from the review process that recommended the new zones. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140464/original/image-20161005-14243-1ktazaf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fish gather over reefs in the Coral Sea.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniela Ceccarelli</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How to do things better</h2>
<p>Better planning for the Coral Sea would move beyond the qualitative goals and principles advocated by the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/cmrreviewexpertscientificpanelreportfinal.pdf">Expert Scientific Panel</a>, which can be readily interpreted to favour economic considerations over conservation. </p>
<p>Because of the global significance of the Coral Sea and uncertainty around the actual risks posed by fishing, effective planning would be truly precautionary, prioritising the persistence of biodiversity where there is doubt. It would also engage with managers and governments in adjacent marine regions to limit cross-boundary threats. </p>
<p>The amount of protection needed for species and other conservation features, including <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecog.01450/full">types of open sea</a> and <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124080966000043">other significant habitats</a>, would be identified quantitatively by experts on marine biodiversity, considering distinctiveness, threats, and reliance on Australian waters for their persistence. </p>
<p>Those conservation objectives would be achieved by a mix of zones that varied levels of protection from place to place and perhaps seasonally to limit the adverse effects of fishing and other extractive activities. The relative contributions of those zones to each objective would be assessed and put into the mix.</p>
<p>Such an explicit approach was a major reason for the lasting, worldwide recognition of the Great Barrier Reef <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00302.x/full">rezoning in 2004</a>, but has been avoided elsewhere in Commonwealth waters to maximise flexibility for extractive interests. </p>
<p>And finally, effective planning would acknowledge that no-take zones in areas with no fishing make no contribution to conservation.</p>
<hr>
<p>*<em>Update: this article has been updated to clarify the use of conservation features in measuring reserve performance</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65219/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bob Pressey receives funding from the Australian Research Council and is a member of WWF Australia's Eminent Scientists Group. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span><a href="mailto:tjward@bigpond.net.au">tjward@bigpond.net.au</a> is affiliated with Seafood Watch, USA. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alana Grech 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>The marine reserves review has recommended major changes to the Coral Sea, but not for the better.Bob Pressey, Professor and Program Leader, Conservation Planning, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook UniversityAlana Grech, Senior lecturer, Macquarie UniversityTrevor J Ward, Adjunct professor, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/662742016-10-03T19:15:44Z2016-10-03T19:15:44ZMarine parks and fishery management: what’s the best way to protect fish?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140033/original/image-20161003-15278-1txbgdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Closing parts of the ocean to fishing displaces fishers to other areas. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tuna image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The federal government is considering changes to Australia’s marine reserves to implement a national system. This week The Conversation is looking at the science behind marine reserves and how to protect our oceans.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>While academics often focus on biodiversity objectives for marine parks, the public and political debate tends to come down to one thing: fishing. </p>
<p>When former federal MP <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/with-barely-one-vote-to-spare-marine-reserve-patchwork-was-saved-20130610-2nzvy.html">Rob Oakeshott cast one of the deciding votes</a> in support of the Commonwealth marine parks plan in 2013, he explained that he believed they <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-04/coalition-motion-to-kill-off-marine-reserve-parks-fails/4733306">benefit fisheries</a>. The federal government has also emphasised the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/5eaad4f9-e8e0-45d1-b889-83648c7b2ceb/files/benefits-mpas.pdf">benefit of marine parks to fisheries production</a>. </p>
<p>There’s also an academic debate. When a study showed that the <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/14-1427.1/full">Great Barrier Reef marine park had harmed fisheries production</a>, there was a <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/15-0457/full">passionate response from other experts</a>. This is despite advocates arguing that reserves are primarily about biodiversity conservation, rather than fishing production. </p>
<p>Clearly, fishing is a hot issue for marine parks. So what does the science say?</p>
<h2>How do marine parks protect fish?</h2>
<p>The proposed benefits to fisheries from marine parks include: protection or insurance against overfishing; “spillover”, where larvae or juveniles from the parks move out and increase the overall production; habitat protection from damaging fishing gear; and managing the ecosystem effects of fishing such as resilience against climate change.</p>
<p>Marine parks regulate activities, mainly fishing, within a specified area. They come in a variety of categories. Some allow fishing, but the most contentious are “no-take” marine parks.</p>
<p>Fishery managers also sometimes close areas of the ocean to fishing. This is different to how no-take marine parks work in two ways: the legislative authority is different (being through fisheries rather than environmental legislation); and the closures usually target a specific fishery, whereas no-take marine parks usually ban all fishing.</p>
<p>Fishery closures, rather than no-take marine parks, are usually applied to protect special areas for particular fish, such as spawning sites or nursery areas. They are also used to protect habitats, such as in the case of trawl closures, which allow the use of other gear such as longlines in the same location. </p>
<p>Fisheries legislation bans damaging fishing gear outright, while benign gears are allowed. In contrast, no-take marine parks tend to exclude all gear types.</p>
<h2>Displacing fishers</h2>
<p>Neither marine parks nor fishery closures regulate the amount of catch and fishing effort. They only control the location. Commercial fishers take most fish caught in Commonwealth waters and most of this is limited by catch quotas.</p>
<p>When a no-take marine park closes an area to fishing, fishers and their catch are displaced into other areas of the ocean. This occurs for all types of fishing, including recreational fishing. Recreational fishers displaced by marine parks don’t stop fishing, they just fish somewhere else – and the same number of fishers are squeezed into a smaller space. </p>
<p>Marine parks increase the intensity of fishing impacts across the wider coast, which is an uncomfortable outcome for marine park advocates. <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00288330.2005.9517344?needAccess=true&#aHR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20vZG9pL3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzAwMjg4MzMwLjIwMDUuOTUxNzM0ND9uZWVkQWNjZXNzPXRydWVAQEAw">Modelling of Victorian marine parks</a> showed that displaced catch would harm lobster stocks and associated ecosystems, and was counterproductive to their fishery management objective of rebuilding stock.</p>
<p>Because ecosystems don’t respond in predictable ways, depletion of fish stocks from the fishing displaced from marine parks could lead to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2793314/">severe ecosystem outcomes</a>. </p>
<p>For this reason, a second and separate management change is often needed after marine parks are declared, which is to reduce the number of fishers and fish caught to prevent risk of impacts from the park. </p>
<p>Controlling how many fish are caught (which is what traditional fisheries management does) has substantially more influence on overall fish abundance than controlling where fish are caught with parks, as <a href="http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(16)30344-X">shown recently on the Great Barrier Reef</a>.</p>
<h2>Public cost</h2>
<p>Commonwealth fisheries catch quotas are routinely reduced <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/about/objectives-functions-powers/">if a fishery harms the sustainability of the marine environment</a>. There’s no compensation to fishers, so there’s no cost to the public, other than a possible reduced supply of fish. </p>
<p>Catches can also be reduced to manage fishing displaced by marine reserves and the outcome is identical except in terms of the public cost. Creation of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park led to over <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/4b3d907c-a200-40ce-88b0-c377c371357f/files/gbrmp-sap-review.doc">A$200 million in payments to displaced fishers</a>. <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/node/20736">Another publicly funded package</a> is planned for the Commonwealth marine reserves. </p>
<p>Marine parks also have high recurring public cost because boundaries need to be policed at sea. Catch quotas can be policed at the wharf, with <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Levy-Guide-2014-15.pdf">compliance costs fully recovered from industry</a>. </p>
<h2>Do marine parks help fish and fishers?</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms3347">Evidence of a benefit to fisheries</a> from marine parks is scarce. However, there are some clear examples of <a href="http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v384/p47-60/">fishing displacement that is so minor</a> that there has been an <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0073922">overall increase in fish</a> inside and outside the park. </p>
<p>These examples show that marine parks can sometimes benefit fish stocks, the fishery and also the overall marine ecosystem. However, these examples come from situations where traditional fishery management has not been applied to prevent overfishing.</p>
<p>This is consistent with modelling of marine parks that shows they only increase overall fish populations when there has been severe overfishing. This generally means that if there’s already <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0107032">effective traditional fisheries management</a>, marine reserves cannot benefit fish stocks and fisheries, or restock fish outside the reserve (spillover) (<a href="http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f05-243">see also here</a>). </p>
<p>In jurisdictions where fisheries management is lacking, any regulation, including through marine reserves, is better than nothing. But this isn’t the situation with Australia’s Commonwealth fisheries where harvest strategies are used and <a href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/media-releases/2015/fishery-status-reports-released">overfishing has been eliminated</a>.</p>
<p>The conclusions from <a href="http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/66/1/122">modelling of marine reserves</a> mean that the areas of the reserves that limit fishing would be expected to reduce fishery production and harm our ability to contribute to global food security. </p>
<p>The Coral Sea marine reserve, in particular, represents an area with known large stocks of fish, especially tuna, that could be harvested sustainably. Limiting fishing in the Coral Sea eliminates any potential for these resources to help feed Australians or contribute to global food supplies. </p>
<p>The potential sustainable, ecologically acceptable harvest from the Coral Sea is unknown, so we don’t know the full scale of what’s being lost and how much the recent changes reduce this problem, although Papua New Guinea sustainably harvests 150,000-300,000 tonnes of tuna in its part of the sea.</p>
<p>Allowing fishing doesn’t mean the oceans aren’t protected. Existing fisheries management is already obliged to ensure fishing doesn’t affect <a href="http://www.afma.gov.au/about/objectives-functions-powers/">sustainability of the marine environment</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66274/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Caleb Gardner has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, the Australian Seafood CRC, and the Tasmanian Government to assess sustainability of fisheries, conduct research on fishery harvest systems and provide advice on improving fisheries sustainability. This includes research evaluating the effectiveness of fishery closures and marine parks. He is affiliated with the University of Tasmania and has participated or is participating in roles on committees that provide management advice to the Tasmanian, Victorian and Australian Commonwealth Government and fishing industry groups including the Tasmanian Lobster Fishermen's Association as a Director (unpaid research representative) of Southern Rock Lobster Ltd. </span></em></p>The public and political debate about marine reserves often comes down to one thing: fishing.Caleb Gardner, Principal Research Fellow, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/652202016-10-02T19:14:51Z2016-10-02T19:14:51ZThe story behind Australia’s marine reserves, and how we should change them<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139694/original/image-20160929-27051-1yshh6r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia's oceans are home to extraordinary marine life. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The federal government is considering changes to Australia’s marine reserves to implement a national system. This week The Conversation is looking at the science behind marine reserves and how to protect our oceans.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>Australia has the third largest marine jurisdiction in the world, a vast ocean territory that contains important natural and biological resources. The oceans separate us from, and connect us to, the rest of the world. </p>
<p>They supply food, play a significant role in determining our climate, and are fundamental to our national identity. Protecting our oceans is of paramount importance and Australia is signatory to several international agreements and conventions to establish a network of marine reserves aimed at looking after marine resources. </p>
<p>In 2012 the Australian government declared a network of marine reserves to conserve our marine environment. In 2014, we were asked to co-chair a review of the reserves, with the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/cmrreviewbioregionaladvisorypanelreportfinal_1.pdf">results released this September</a>.</p>
<p>We looked at five marine regions (North, North-West, South-West, Temperate East and the Coral Sea) but not the South-East network which had been established in 2007. Of the 40 reserves administered by the commonwealth government, we recommended changes to 26. </p>
<figure>
<figcaption>Click on the marine reserve regions in the map below to details of the changes proposed.</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-218" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/218/e9b028d5aff52ef4a1e0215c9544ac732e43437e/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The review was established to address stakeholder concerns about how the reserves were zoned – and what activities were allowed in each zone – as well as ensuring that zoning decisions were informed by the best available science. </p>
<p>One of the strong messages we received was that people were tired of the process – having been asked about the same concerns when the reserves were declared. But the opportunity to raise concerns and suggest solutions was quickly taken up. </p>
<p>We held more than 260 meetings with more than 650 people between February and August 2015, considered 13,124 written submissions, the vast majority from individuals, and received 1,859 responses to an online survey.</p>
<h2>What has changed?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/b5a7d0e1-ad86-4a24-8b34-ae9b49d8a2d0/files/nrsmpa-establishing-guidelines.pdf">primary goal</a> of the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA) is to create a system of reserves that is comprehensive (includes the full range of ecosystems within and across each bioregion), adequate (ensures ecological viability and the integrity of populations, species and communities) and representative (reasonably reflects the biodiversity of the marine ecosystem). This will ensure our marine ecosystems stay healthy for generations to come. </p>
<p>Zoning allows us to regulate activities within marine reserves without detracting from their conservation value. These zones range from no-take, which doesn’t allow any resource extraction (such as fishing or mining), through to multiple use and special purpose zones, where certain uses are, or may be, allowed, subject to an assessment of their potential impacts.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/vNqTu/1/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
<p>We made seven major recommendations:</p>
<p>• Put more conservation features such as seafloor types, canyons, reef, slope and shelf in no-take protection (from 331 to 352 of the 509 primary conservation features recognised in the reserves).</p>
<p>• Increase the area of no-take zones in four regions, but reduce the area of no-take zone to 41% of the Coral Sea. This means the overall proportion of no-take across the 40 reserves drops marginally from 36% to 33% – the same level as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.</p>
<p>• An 81% increase in the area zoned as Habitat Protection Zone (HPZ) – an additional 450,000 square kilometres – rising from 24% to 43% of the estate; and add more conservation features in the HPZ – (from 192 to 272 of the 509 conservation features).</p>
<p>• A 27% increase to just over three quarters (76%) of the overall area of the estate receiving a high level of protection under Sanctuary Zone, Marine National Park Zone or Habitat Protection Zone; all these zones prohibit activities such as seabed mining and fishing that damages the seafloor.</p>
<p>• The total area zoned as Multiple Use Zone is halved, from 36% to 18% of the estate.</p>
<p>• Protection for the coral reefs in the Coral Sea is improved (three additional reefs – Holmes, South Flinders and Wreck – zoned as national park, and all 34 reefs zoned as sanctuary, national park, or habitat protection, and notably improving protection of the reefs of the Marion Plateau).</p>
<p>• Our proposed zoning in the Coral Sea to decrease national park zones and increase habitat protection more strongly reflects zoning in the adjacent Great Barrier Reef, effectively increasing the area of GBR green zones.</p>
<p>Clearly these changes do not support <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/australias-marine-parks-under-threat-after-review-environment-groups-say-20160905-gr912v.html">claims</a> that the recommendations will “trigger a devastating loss of threatened marine life”. Nor do they represent “huge cutbacks to marine hotspots”, or “expanded mining”. </p>
<p>On the contrary, they represent a significant improvement to biodiversity included in no-take and other highly protected zones, and better conservation of key features such as southern coral reefs of the Coral Sea. </p>
<h2>Who will this affect?</h2>
<p>Commonwealth waters, starting at 3 nautical miles (about 5.5 km) from the coast, are generally beyond the safe reach of most recreational fishers and the direct influence of coastal communities. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, there were some areas of particular significance to the recreational fishing, charter fishing and dive tourism sectors such as the Perth Canyon and the Coral Sea, which were adversely affected by the reserves’ proclamation in 2012. The review recommendations accommodated almost all of these concerns through local solutions developed in close consultation with users and their representatives. </p>
<p>The guiding principles of the marine reserves include that zones are based on specific activities, and socioeconomic costs should be minimised. </p>
<p>We were particularly mindful of the socioeconomic importance of fisheries, especially to regional communities. Australia has been <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7GTc1IYrQA">globally acknowledged for its management of fisheries</a>. For instance, we recognised Marine Stewardship Certification (MSC) of tuna longlining in the Coral Sea and the Northern Prawn Fishery in our consideration of these two valuable fisheries.</p>
<p>We assessed the risk that certain fishing methods such prawn trawling, longlining and midwater trawling posed to marine habitats using the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/23061bf8-df19-4b74-b867-5a57ccbc5c8b/files/cmrreviewexpertscientificpanelreportfinal.pdf">most up-to-date scientific information and understanding</a>. Along with historical catch records, we used these to develop recommendations on zoning in the marine reserves. </p>
<p>For commercial fisheries that operate in Commonwealth waters, we consulted with users and industry peak bodies and found solutions that reduced impacts on these fisheries while improving the protection of conservation features. The outcome is that displacement of commercial fishing, and therefore adjustment cost to taxpayers (if any) is lower.</p>
<p>Due to the importance of energy security, the original reserve network design was constrained by largely avoiding areas of oil and gas prospects and leases. Where marine reserves and prospects co-exist the zoning is generally multiple use.</p>
<p>The review recommended several departures from this constraint. Much of the Bremer reserve in WA, an area where large fish, mammals and seabirds are known to aggregate, is proposed as a no-take national park, despite high petroleum prospects. Similarly, we recommended that mining and exploration activities be excluded from Geographe Bay. </p>
<p>In the North we proposed more protection in several reserves by extending areas under habitat protection and national park where prospects are low. We also recommended a significant extension of national park at the head of the Great Australian Bight, a well-known site where whales gather.</p>
<p>By-and-large the ports and shipping sectors are not affected by marine reserves. Safe passage of ships is guaranteed under <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea">the law of the sea</a>. However, we proposed changes to the Dampier marine reserve to include a Special Purpose Zone for an area where there is existing high intensity port and shipping activity. </p>
<p>Finally, Indigenous groups and representatives also participated in the review. We recommended that Indigenous communities should be encouraged to explore future socioeconomic opportunities from activities in reserves in or near traditional sea country. These activities could include Indigenous rangers monitoring and managing marine reserves. </p>
<h2>Where to from here?</h2>
<p>We believe the review struck a considered, science-based and robust balance of marine user interests, while improving the protection of key conservation features. Its recommendations address almost all of the major areas of contention raised during the review. </p>
<p>There is no loss of area under conservation management (reserve outer boundaries are unchanged), more of the estate is more highly protected, yet the displacement of commercial fisheries has been reduced through careful zone adjustments. </p>
<p>The review provides a strong foundation for future generations to benefit from the conservation, appreciation and sustainable use of the marine reserves – as long as it is effectively managed and adequately resourced.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65220/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colin Buxton was co-chair the Bioregional Advisory Panel and a member of the Expert Scientific Panel of the Commonwealth Marine Reserves Review
He is currently Chair of the Board of Southern Rocklobster Ltd and a member of the Board of the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC)
He has been the recipient of several research grants from the FRDC and the Tasmanian State Government</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Cochrane was a co-chair of the Bioregional Advisory Panel and a member of the Expert Scientific Panel of the Commonwealth Marine Reserves Review. He chairs the Steering Committee of the National Environment Science Program's Marine Biodiversity hub. He is a Councillor of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. He has received funding from the Australian Government Department of Environment.</span></em></p>Australia has the third largest marine jurisdiction in the world, a vast ocean territory that contains important natural and biological resources. And it needs protecting.Colin Buxton, Adjunct Professor, Fisheries Aquaculture and Coasts Centre IMAS, University of TasmaniaPeter Cochrane, Adjunct Fellow Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.