Download complementing ecological science in marine protected areas

COMPLEMENTING ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN
MARINE PROTECTED AREAS LEGISLATION
Dr. Vernon G. Thomas, Professor Emeritus
Department of Integrative Biology
College of Biological Science
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 Canada
E-mail: [email protected]
RATIONALES FOR MARINE PROTECTION
DEAD WATER ZONES
CAUSED BY TERRESTRIAL
POLLUTION
COMMERCIAL
OVER-FISHING OF STOCKS
DISASTERS FROM MARINE
OIL & GAS EXTRACTION
REPRESENTING NATURE IN LAW:
BRIDGING THE TWO SOLITUDES
ESSENCE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENT → RELEVANT LAWS & REGULATIONS
DESCRIPTION → PROSCRIPTION
DESIRE → REALITY
ROLE OF MARINE ECOLOGY:
DEFINE THE ESSENCE OF THE MARINE BIOLOGICAL & PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
TRANSLATE CONCEPTS OF ECOLOGICAL IMORTANCE INTO PROVISIONS OF LAW TO:
- ENABLE GOVERNMENTS TO PRIORIZE AREAS FOR PROTECTION
- ESTABLISH MARINE PROTECTED AREAS (MPAs)
- MANAGE AND PROTECT SUCH AREAS
OCEANS ARE NOT UNIFORM ENVIRONMENTS. THEY VARY ENORMOUSLY IN
BIODIVERSITY AND FEATURES: SO WHAT, WHERE, AND HOW?
WHAT DO YOU WANT TO ACHIEVE?
SINGLE, ISOLATED MARINE PROTECTED AREA?
SINGLE, ISOLATED, MARINE CONSERVATION AREA?
MARINE PROTECTED AREAS NETWORK ?
WHAT FUNCTIONS WILL IT SERVE?
BIOLOGICAL PRESERVE: NO HUMAN USE; CREATED TO PROTECT SPECIES FROM ALL
HUMAN ACTIVITES (TOURISM, FISHING, EXTRACTION).
USE IS RECOGNIZED, AS IN
- MARINE PARK: HUMAN USES ARE IMPLICIT. OTHER CRITERIA MAY BE USED,
REPRESENTATION, SCENIC VALUE, GEOLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ATTRACTIONS.
THEN EXISTING PARK LAW IS BEST SUITED TO DEAL WITH SUCH AREAS.
- FISH RECRUITMENT SANCTUARY: AREA IS IDENTIFIED TO PRODUCE SPECIES THAT
DISPERSE INTO ADJACENT AREAS AND SUPPORT COMMERCIAL FISHERY.
OR, A MPA NETWORK: PROVIDES CONNECTIVITY AMONG AREAS TO ENHANCE ROLES
THEREFORE CREATE LEGAL PROVISIONS UP FRONT.
NEW THINKING IN MARINE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION &
PROTECTION
- BASED LARGELY ON TERRESTRIAL PARK RESERVE THEORY
- MANY AREAS ARE TOO SMALL TO GIVE FULL PROTECTION, WHEN HUMAN USES
ENCROACH ON BOUNDARIES
- ATTEMPT TO LINK AREAS TOGETHER BY FORMING PROTECTED AREA NETWORKS
- INCREASES TOTAL FUNCTIONAL AREA FOR BIODIVERSITY
- CORRIDORS PROMOTE MOVEMENT AND NATURAL DISPERSAL OF ORGANISMS
- PREVENT LOCAL EXTINCTION OF SPECIES DUE TO INADEQUATE SIZE OF ORIGINAL
AREA
- SAME CONCEPT APPLIED TO MARINE AREAS
WHERE SCIENCE CAN BE MOST USEFUL
-
IN CREATING NEW AREAS FOR BIODIVERSITY VERSUS MANAGING EXISTING
AREAS
-
IN PRIORIZING WHICH AREAS ARE TO BE ESTABLISHED AS MPAs FOR
BIODIVERSITY
-
VERY IMPORTANT IN DEFINING COMPONENTS OF CONNECTED NETWORKS
VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs
SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER
PRODUCTIVITY& RECRUITMENT: CAPACITY OF AREA TO SUPPORT
FOOD WEBS & ADD NEW MEMBERS OF POPULATIONS. THIS
APPLIES TO ALL SPECIES OF THE MARINE COMMUNITY.
MIGRATION PATTERNS: PREDICTABLE MOVEMENT OF SPECIES
WITHIN AND INTO MARINE AREAS.
BIODIVERSITY: TOTAL OF SPECIES PRESENT AND RELATIVE
ABUNDANCE.
PRESENCE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTED BY OTHER
LAWS.
CONNECTIVITY: PHYSICAL PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR REGIONS
CRITICAL FEATURES: PRESENCE OF REEFS, LEDGES, CANYONS
Diverse habitats
Number of
species
Less diverse
habitats
Size of area (log)
IMPORTANCE OF SIZE IN BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION
VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs
SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER
PRODUCTIVITY& RECRUITMENT: CAPACITY OF AREA TO SUPPORT
FOOD WEBS & ADD NEW MEMBERS OF POPULATIONS. THIS
APPLIES TO ALL SPECIES OF THE MARINE COMMUNITY.
MIGRATION PATTERNS: PREDICTABLE MOVEMENT OF SPECIES
WITHIN AND INTO MARINE AREAS.
BIODIVERSITY: TOTAL OF SPECIES PRESENT AND RELATIVE
ABUNDANCE.
PRESENCE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTED BY OTHER
LAWS.
CONNECTIVITY: PHYSICAL PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR REGIONS
CRITICAL FEATURES: PRESENCE OF REEFS, LEDGES, CANYONS
IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY
NUTRIENT DELIVERY
HEAT TRANSPORT
IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY
B2B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA NETWORK
NUTRIENT DELIVERY
HEAT TRANSPORT
WHALES, MIGRATORY
SEABIRDS, FISH,
INVERTEBRATES
VITAL PARTS OF MPA
NETWORK
SAME CAN BE DONE FOR
OTHER REGIONS OF WORLD
IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY
B2B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA NETWORK
NUTRIENT DELIVERY
HEAT TRANSPORT
WHALES, MIGRATORY
SEABIRDS, FISH,
INVERTEBRATES
VITAL PARTS OF MPA
NETWORK
SAME CAN BE DONE FOR
OTHER REGIONS OF WORLD
PROPOSED B2B EXAMPLE FOR NORTH AMERICA.
DOES LEGISLATION REFLECT ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA?
&
DOES LAW ALLOW CREATION OF NETWORKS?
EXAMINE LEGISLATION AT THE
INTERNATIONAL TREATY, NATIONAL,
AND STATE – PROVINCIAL LEVELS.
REFLECTION OF CRITERIA IN LAW
1: INTERNATIONAL TREATIES
CBD, 1992
VULNERABLE CRITICAL HABITATS
BIODIVERSITY: CRITICAL SPECIES
Art. 8f
Art. 8f,k
UNCLOS III, 1982
Art. 194
Art 194
NO PROVISIONS FOR SIZE, MIGRATION PATTERNS, PRODUCTIVITYRECRUITMENT, AND CONNECTIVITY
2: NATIONAL LAW. US EXAMPLE
National Marine
Fishery Conserv.
Marine Mammal
Criteria
Sanctuaries Act
Mgmt. Act
Protection Act
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Size
S.303.a(5)
x
x
Recruitment
S.303.b1(A)
x
Migration
Inferred*
Special Biodiversity
S. 303.b1(A)
x
S.1361(2(2))
Connectivity
Inferred**
x
x
S.1801(b(2))
x
S.1361(2(2))
Critical Habitat Features
Inferred**
x
S.1361(2(2))
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
•
* Inferred as part of “an ecological process”.
•
** Inferred as “managed as a coherent system”.
3: NATIONAL LAW. CANADIAN EXAMPLE
National Marine
National Parks
Oceans
Fisheries
Conservation Areas
Act
Act
Act
Criterion
Act
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Size
s.9(3)
s.8(2)
x
x
Recruitment
s. 9(3)
s.8(2)
x
x
Migration
s.9(3)
s.8(2)
x
x
Special Biodiversity
s.9(3)
s.8(2)
Connectivity
Implied
Implied
Critical Habitat features
s.9(3)
s.8(2)
s.35(1b)
x
x
x
s.35
s.35(1)
(1a,b,c,d)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Oceans Act & Fisheries Act used to implement MPAs in Canada; Jurisdiction is Fisheries & Oceans Canada
Environment Canada administers national parks and marine conservation areas in which human use is assumed
4: STATE LAW. CALIFORNIA EXAMPLE
Criteria
Ocean Resources
Mgmt. Act
Marine Life
Protection Act
Marine Managed Areas
Improvement Act
Size
√
√
√
Recruitment
√
√
√
Migration Patterns
√
√
√
Special Biodiversity
√
√
√
Connectivity
√
√
√
Critical Habitat Features
√
√
√
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Mexican law is not as well provisioned.
These jurisdictions must improve provisions in law.
CONCLUSIONS:
1: FOR BIODIVERSITY PRESERVATION MPA NETWORKS IS THE FUTURE;
- CONNECTIVITY ACROSS CHANGING SEASCAPES
- NETWORKS EMBRACE ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND SCALE
2: IMPORTANT ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA MUST BE REFLECTED, EXPLICITLY, IN
LAW TO FACILITATE CREATION OF MPAs
3: FOR NETWORKS CREATION;
- MOST FEDERAL US AND CANADIAN JURISDICTIONS NEED TO IMPROVE LAW
- A HARMONIZED APPROACH ACROSS JURISDICTIONS IS REQUIRED
CONTINUITY OF PROVISIONS ACROSS LEVELS
CONCEPT OF “NESTING, SO THAT
THERE IS RECIPROCITY OF LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
WITHIN AND ACROSS LEVELS,
LOCAL TO INTERNATIONAL
INTERNATIONAL: TREATIES
NATIONAL LAW
STATE, PROVINCIAL, LAW
LOCAL, MUNICIPAL, LAW