This online article argues that when no-takes zones are combined with Territorial User Rights Fisheries (TURF), both fisheries and ecological priorities benefit more than when only no-takes zones exist in the area. With this community-driven protection system, local artisanal fishers receive exclusive access to a selected fishery area, which makes the ‘race to fish’ impossible.
Harvest control rules and no-take marine reserves are two management approaches increasingly advocated as effective means of rebuilding depleted fish stocks and averting the collapse of fisheries. We incorporate the two approaches into a bioeconomic model and evaluate how they act as substitutes and/or complements when used together in fisheries stock recovery plans.
This video is a part of Conservation Strategy Fund's collection of environmental economic lessons and was made possible thanks to the support of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Marcia Brady Tucker Foundation. This series is for individuals who want to learn - or review - the basic economics of conservation. This video looks at marine protected areas within the fishing industry and the costs and benefits involved in establishing these areas.
No-take marine reserves are effective management tools used to restore fish biomass and community structure in areas depleted by overfishing. Cabo Pulmo National Park (CPNP) was created in 1995 and is the only well enforced no-take area in the Gulf of California, Mexico, mostly because of widespread support from the local community. In 1999, four years after the establishment of the reserve, there were no significant differences in fish biomass between CPNP (0.75 t ha−1 on average) and other marine protected areas or open access areas in the Gulf of California.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are a common tool for conserving and managing marine and coastal ecosystems. MPAs encompass a range of protection levels, from fully protected no-take reserves to restriction of only particular activities, gear types, user groups, target species, or extraction periods. There is a growing body of scientific evidence supporting the ecological benefits of full reserve protection, but it is more difficult to generalize about the effects of other types of MPAs, in part because they include a range of actual protection levels.
No-take marine reserves are widely recognized as an effective conservation tool for protecting marine resources. Despite considerable empirical evidence that abundance and biomass of fished species increase within marine reserve boundaries, the potential for reserves to provide fisheries and conservation benefits to adjacent waters remains heavily debated.
How much does the fishery at Apo Island benefit from spillover of adult fish from the adjacent marine reserve?
The contribution of the no-take marine reserve at Apo Island, Philippines, to local fishery yield through "spillover" (net export of adult fish) was estimated. Spatial patterns of fishing effort, yield, and catch rates around Apo Island were documented daily in 2003-2004. Catch rates were higher near the reserve (by a factor of 1.1 to 2.0) but fishing effort was often lowest there. Higher catch rates near the reserve were more likely due to spillover than to low fishing intensity.
To our knowledge, this paper provides the first global, economically supported assessment of the impact on fisheries of potentially protecting a portion of the high seas in no-take marine protected areas. Such closures are likely to result in relatively little global annual profit loss. For example, closure of 20% of the high seas may lead to the loss of only 1.8% of the current global reported marine fisheries catch, and a decrease in profits to the high seas fleet of about US$270 million per year.
Results show, on average, positive effects of reserve protection on the biomass, numerical density, species richness, and size of organisms within their boundaries which are remarkably similar to those of past syntheses despite a near doubling of data.
Using genetic parentage analyses, this study resolves patterns of larval dispersal for two species of exploited coral reef fish within a network of marine reserves on the Geat Barrier Reef. In a 1,000 km2 study area populations resident in three reserves exported 83% (coral trout, Plectropomus maculatus) and 55% (stipey snapper, Lutjanus carponotatus) of assigned offspring to fished reefs, with the remainder having recruited to natal reserves or other reserves in the region.