Transcript Slide 1

Practical application of scientific criteria for
selection of marine protected areas
Keith Hiscock, Emma Jackson & Olivia Langmead
Biodiversity and Conservation Science Programme,
Marine Biological Association, UK
For the World Conference on Marine Biodiversity, Valencia, 11-15 November 2008
Presentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentations
Plymouth Sound European Marine Site
Practical application of scientific criteria for selection of
marine protected areas
The presentation
• International, European, North Atlantic and UK imperatives
• The criteria that we must and should apply
• Applying criteria: our practical experience – and keeping
sight of the real world (using knowledge of biology, not
relying on predictive models)
Some current imperatives for marine
protected areas
…. the establishment of marine protected areas
consistent with international law and based on
scientific information, including representative
networks by 2012 …
…. complete, designate, finance and ensure
effective, management of the Natura 2000
network by 2010 (2012 for marine sites)
….. establishing an ecologically coherent
network of well-managed MPAs in the
North-East Atlantic by 2010.
…. establishing a well-managed and ecologically
coherent network of Marine Protected Areas
(MPAs) by 2012 [England & Wales].
The criteria that we must and should apply
We must apply the criteria (and their interpretation) that are in
the relevant directives, conventions and statutes (no matter
how poorly drafted or not relevant to marine biodiversity)
We should apply criteria that are the most effective, beneficial
and meaningful for identifying representative and important
features including rare and threatened habitats and species.
In summary:
“Representative, and preferably the best”
Ecological/scientific criteria to use – Use them!
OSPAR ‘Ecological
criteria/considerations’¹
• Threatened or declining
species and
habitats/biotopes*
• ‘Important’ species and
habitats/biotopes*
• Ecological significance
• High natural biological
diversity*
• Representativity
• Sensitivity *
• Naturalness
CBD ‘Scientific criteria’²
• Uniqueness or rarity*
• Special importance for life
history stages of species
•Importance for threatened,
endangered or declining
species and/or habitats*
• Vulnerability, fragility,
sensitivity or slow recovery*
• Biological productivity
• Biological diversity*
• Naturalness
* Approaches demonstrated in this presentation
¹‘Guidelines for the Identification and Selection of Marine Protected Areas in the OSPAR Maritime Area’
(Reference number: 2003-17). See www.ospar.org.
² Convention on Biodiversity. COP Decision 9 IX/20, Bonn, 19-30 May, 2008. See www.cbd.int/conventions
Design criteria: making the ‘best’ choices
for the most effective and beneficial MPA
series¹
20
• Representativity*
• Replication*
• Viability
• Adequacy
• Maximum connectivity*
• Protection
• Use best available evidence*
* Approaches demonstrated in this presentation
¹ Based OSPAR and IUCN criteria in draft guidance on the proposed approach to the selection and designation
of Marine Conservation Zones under Part 4 of the draft Marine Bill in the UK. Available from:
www.defra.gov.uk/marine/biodiversity/marine-bill/guidance.htm
Structures to use – use them!
www.jncc.gov.uk/marine
Applying ecological/scientific criteria: 1.
“Threatened or declining species and habitats/biotopes”
(OSPAR); “Uniqueness or rarity”, and “Importance for
threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats”
(CBD)
Identified in the UK as ‘Nationally
Important Marine Features’ (NIMF)¹
¹ Connor et al. 2002. Rationale and criteria for the identification of nationally important
marine nature conservation features and areas in the UK. Version 02.11. (Available from:
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/PDF/sg341.pdf)
Defining ‘Nationally Important Marine
Features’ (in the UK )
Summary of criteria for species (habitats criteria similar):
1. Proportional Importance
A high proportion of the populations of a species occurs within the UK.
2. Rarity
Marine species that are sessile or of restricted mobility are considered nationally rare if
distribution is restricted to eight or less 10km squares (0.5%) within the 3 mile territorial
seas limit of UK waters.
3. Decline
An observed, estimated, inferred or suspected significant decline (exceeding expected or known
natural fluctuations) in numbers, extent or quality of a marine species in the UK (quality refers to
life history parameters). Decline should be at least 25% in the past 25 years where figures
are available.
4. Threat of decline
It is estimated, inferred or suspected that a species will suffer a significant decline in the
foreseeable future as a result of human activity. (Factors included for Biodiversity Action Plans:
1. It is predicted that the species will decline by 50% in a current 25 year period, or in the
next 25 years; 2. The species is believed to be long-lived (>25 years) with a low recovery
potential and if action is not taken to reverse current trends then the species is likely to become
extinct in the next 100 years.)
Outcomes from the (UK) NIMF research¹
1. 402 species identified as Nationally Important (of which,
probably, 250 (approx. 2.5% of UK total multicellular species)
would satisfy more stringent criteria)
2. 34 habitats (as EUNIS Level 4 biotopes) (approx 12% of total
British Isles seabed biotopes) identified as Nationally Important
(excluding biotopes that satisfy criteria only because they =
Habitats Directive Annex 1 Habitats)
Proposals to rationalize the list are being considered
Database available from: www.marlin.ac.uk/pap (awaiting
permission)
¹ Hiscock, K., Harris, R. & Lukey, J. 2006. Nationally Important Marine Features and Biodiversity Action Plan
Marine Priority Habitats and Species. Report to the Joint Nature Conservation Committee from the Marine
Biological Association. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association. JNCC Contract F90-01-892.
Examples of Nationally Important Marine
species:
Sunset coral,
Leptopsammia pruvoti.
Nationally rare in the
UK. Larva short-lived,
settles very near parent.
Wig weed, Ascophyllum
nodosum f. mackii is an
unattached seaweed that
grows in extremely
sheltered locations, is
slow growing and
vulnerable to habitat
change and gathering.
Fan mussel, Atrina fragilis.
Nationally rare in the UK.
Populations devastated by
mobile fishing gear.
Examples of Nationally Important marine
habitats
Maerl, Phymatolithon
calcareum, beds.
Threatened by fish farms,
extraction for soil
conditioners, scallop
dredging. Long-lived &
slow-growing.
Reefs of the tube worm
Serpula vermicularis.
Known from one location in
the UK. Threatened by
organic pollution and
mobile fishing gear.
Deep sheltered mud.
Characteristic of sealochs.
Associated communities
threatened by dredging for
scampi (Nephrops
norvegicus).
Applying ecological/scientific criteria 2.
“High natural biological diversity” (OSPAR) and “Biological
diversity” (CBD)
Identifying biodiversity hotspots: Marine biodiversity hotspots
are areas of high species and habitat richness that include
representative, rare and threatened features¹
Measures trialled in the WWF-UK and MBA study:
• Species richness
• Biotope richness
• Candidate NIMF species richness
• Candidate NIMF biotope richness
• Average taxonomic distinctness
• Average biotope distinctness
¹ Hiscock, K. & Breckels, M. 2007. Marine Biodiversity Hotspots: identification and protection. Godalming:
WWF UK. Available from: http://assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/marinehotspots.pdf
We had data for 120 well-surveyed areas and analysed it to
identify biodiversity hotspots – only examples here: read the
report for context
1.
2.
1. Species Richness and 2. Average taxonomic distinctness for 6 major phyla.
Red dots represent ‘hot’ areas or high diversity, green dots represent areas of
expected diversity and blue dots show areas with lower than expected diversity.
Applying ecological/scientific criteria 3.
“Sensitivity” (OSPAR) and “Vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity or
slow recovery” (CBD)
www.marlin.ac.uk
Hiscock, K. & Tyler-Walters, H. 2006.
Identifying sensitivity in marine
ecosystems: the MarLIN programme.
Hydrobiologia, 555, 309-320.
Applying practical/design criteria 1.
“Representativity” and “Replication”
You need:
1. Information on what occurs where;
2. Targets for degree of replication.
• For ‘representativity’, identification of biotopes needs to be to
at least level 4 of the EUNIS classification.
• ‘Important’ biotopes and species need to be represented in
the mpa site series.
• ‘Replication’ should be in biogeographical regions and of
biotopes and ‘important’ species.
• Replication may not be possible for rare biotopes and species.
Jackson, E.L., Hiscock, K., Evans, J.L., Seeley, R. & Lear, D.B. 2008. Representativity and replication for a
coherent network of Marine Protected Areas in England’s territorial waters. Report to Natural England from
the Marine Biological Association. Natural England Contract SAE03-02-104. Natural England Research
Report NERR ???. Available from www.marlin.ac.uk/pap (when published).
Applying practical/design criteria 2.
“Maximum connectivity”
Connectivity between areas depends on the type and longevity
of propagules, and on direction and strength of water currents
Mean dispersal distance estimates for marine benthic organisms. From: Kinlan, B. P., and S. D. Gaines.
2003. Propagule dispersal in marine and terrestrial environments: a community perspective. Ecology 84:
2007-2020.
Developing information resources to inform
assessments of degree of connectivity
www.marlin.ac.uk/biotic
Many sessile species recruit close to their parents and adjacent
mpa’s cannot be assumed to support each other.
Practical application of scientific criteria
for selection of marine protected areas
Summary conclusions
1. Use already established (but sound) criteria and structures.
2. Use existing data and information now to identify
representative locations that also include rare, scarce in
decline or threatened with decline species and habitats.
3. Broadscale habitat data will not be sufficiently detailed or
accurate to ensure that there is representation of important
features for biodiversity conservation.
4. ‘Connectivity’ between mpa’s is unlikely for many species.
5. Put your efforts into adding to our knowledge base, not
crawling over methodologies and approaches (i.e. meetings!).
6. Always work in the ‘real world’ of scientific knowledge.
Presentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentations.html
Thankyou
Returning to Plymouth from a dive in a possible Marine Conservation Zone