Download WP5 notes

INCOFISH WP5
MPAs on Continental Shelves
Fisheries and Ecosystem
Management
Objectives
Review the nature of three selected ecosystems and the
role and effectiveness and operation of selected existing
MPAs within these ecosystems. Examine the need and
potential role of further MPAs within these ecosystems.
Run simulations of MPA effectiveness with Ecopath models
developed in conjunction with WP4 for the selected
ecosystems. Examine effects of size and placement on the
effectiveness of MPAs for selected ecosystems.
Develop supporting models to supplement and aid
interpretation of the Ecopath output, or to examine
situations that can not be explicitly tested with the
Ecopath models.
Develop conceptual model for the development of MPA
networks on the basis of results from the above
Project Partners
Prof Nick Polunin
Newcastle Uni, UK
Dr Will Le Quesne
Dr John Pinnegar
CEFAS, UK
Dr Steve Mackinson
Prof Francisco Arreguín-Sánchez
CICIMAR, Mexico
Manuel Zetina-Rejón, Co-workers
Prof Haigen Xu
Co-workers
NIES, China
Case Studies
Case Studies
• Define offshore and onshore boundaries for models.
As much as possible model self-contained ecosystems.
How shallow are we taking landward boundaries?
especially intertidal marshes and estuarine areas.
• What is known of fisheries data, biology and life
history of species, benthic habitats, and at what
spatial resolution.
• Keep a vague eye on allowing direct comparability
between models of different areas, i.e. similar
approach to dealing with land and sea boundaries, cell
size, approach to defining habitats, etc.
Case Studies - North Sea
Approximate
boundary of ICES
area IV - North Sea
Case Studies - North Sea
In the North Sea there are a
number of areas closed fishing.
None of these exclude all fishing
activities.
‘Boxes’ were established for very
different purposes (e.g. to allow
particular species to recover, to
prevent accidental bycatch, to
protect juveniles, to protect
seabirds).
‘Boxes’ have had varying success
– some have worked, some have
completely failed!
Case Studies - Gulf of Mexico
Continental Shelf of Yucatan
Proposed study
area
Gulf of Mexico
Yucatán
Campeche Bank
ecosystem
Protected area
Campeche Sound
Campeche
Laguna de Terminos
Proposed
protected areas
Main seasonal
movements
Main inputs of
production
Case Studies - Yellow Sea
Bohai Sea
Objectives – Review
Review the nature of three selected ecosystems
and the role and effectiveness and operation of
selected existing MPAs within these ecosystems.
Examine the need and potential role of further
MPAs within these ecosystems.
Deliverable 5.1 review report required month 16.
Main report to be compiled by Will at Newcastle,
with input on specific areas from CICIMAR and
NIES (and CEFAS?). Input from CICIMAR and
NIES to be complete by month 13.
Objectives – Review
Review to cover general description of physical chemical and
biological characteristics of each ecosystem.
List 10-20 main species of interest (commercial and/or ecological
significance), with overview of life history, habitat preferences,
extent of movements, susceptibility to different types of fishing
gear.
Overview of fishery operations in the region, main target species
and gears used. Brief overview of present fisheries management
in the area. Plus other significant impacts (e.g. pollution)
Examine the aims, operation, costs, stakeholder involvement and
effectiveness of one or more existing MPAs in the ecosystem.
Identify potential role and location of additional MPAs for the
region. Put forward ideas for the sort of MPA we might consider
in the simulations.
Objectives – Simulations
Run simulations of MPA effectiveness with Ecopath
models developed in conjunction with WP4 for the
selected ecosystems. Examine effects of size and
placement on the effectiveness of MPAs for selected
ecosystems.
Deliverable 5.2 analysis of size and placement of
selected MPAs using models from WP4. Report required
month 28, but according to Annex I, full spatial
ecosystem models from WP4 at month 25! Will to
compile main report with input from CEFAS, CICIMAR
and NIES. All Yellow Sea modelling to be done in WP5.
Deadline for internal inputs for report ?
Objectives – Simulations
Modelling of roles of existing and proposed MPAs
Spatial considerations critical to understanding MPAs.
Incorporate bycatch/discards
Consider ecosystem effects of different gear types
Include protection of ‘critical’ habitats.
Consider interaction of management within and outside MPAs.
Compare MPA based and ‘traditional’ management
Examine first what is ecologically desirable (e.g. very large areas)
Then consider what is politically/socially feasible
Consider that MPAs do not need to be total closures (e.g. ‘boxes’)
How do WP4 and WP5 interact?
Objectives – Supporting Models
Develop supporting models to supplement and aid
interpretation of the Ecopath output, or to examine
situations that can not be explicitly tested with the Ecopath
models.
Not a specific work package deliverable.
Possibility to examine some of the key underlying theory of
application of MPAs to mobile stocks / multi-species fisheries
in a simplified environment.
Draw out simplified scenarios of critical interactions, or
consistent themes identified from across several regions.
Along the lines of approaches carried out by Guénette &
Pitcher 1999 (Fish. Res. 39:295-303), and Quinn et al. 1993
(Am Zool. 33: 537-550).
Objectives – Conceptual Model
Develop conceptual model for the development of MPA
networks on the basis of results from the above
investigations.
Deliverable 5.3 Conceptual model of MPA planning in offshore
continental waters. Report and step by step tool required by
month 31. Will require input from all project partners, Will to
compile final report?
Look for consistent themes as to the size, and placement of
MPAs from across the three case studies.
Look for consistent themes as to the use of MPAs for
protecting specific habitats, types of stocks, aggregations
etc. from within and across the case studies.
Try and develop objective criteria for development of MPAs.
Consider relationship between MPAs and other management.
Deliverable 5.4
Report on outcomes of WP5 by month 34.
Input from all partners. Report to be compiled by
Will??
Deliverable 5.5
At least 5 papers related to WP5 to be submitted
by end of project.
Workshops
First workshop – Select MPAs and distribute tasks.
Month 5. Here, now?
Second workshop – analyse selected case studies. WP
members, representatives of WP4 and 9. Month 19.
Third workshop – review analysis and develop conceptual
framework. WP members, representative(s) WP4. Month
25.
Do we know and understand:
project objectives?
division of work amongst WP partners?
what is required by each and when?
financial and administrative aspects of WP5?
Any further questions?