Practical application of scientific criteria for selection of marine protected areas

Keith Hiscock, Emma Jackson & Olivia LangmeadBiodiversity and Conservation Science Programme,

Marine Biological Association, UK

For the World Conference on Marine Biodiversity, Valencia, 11-15 November 2008

Plymouth Sound European Marine Site

Presentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentationsPresentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentations

The presentation

• International, European, North Atlantic and UK imperatives

Practical application of scientific criteria for selection of marine protected areas

• Applying criteria: our practical experience – and keeping sight of the real world (using knowledge of biology, not relying on predictive models)

• The criteria that we must and should apply

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 …

….. 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].

…. complete, designate, finance and ensure effective, management of the Natura 2000 network by 2010 (2012 for marine sites)

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”

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

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

* Approaches demonstrated in this presentation

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

Ecological/scientific criteria to use – Use them!

Design criteria: making the ‘best’ choices for the most effective and beneficial MPA series¹

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

• Representativity*

• Replication*

• Viability

20

• Adequacy

• Maximum connectivity*

• Protection

• Use best available evidence*

* Approaches demonstrated in this presentation

Structures to use – use them!Structures to use – use them!

www.jncc.gov.uk/marine

Identified in the UK as ‘Nationally Important Marine Features’ (NIMF)¹

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)

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 ImportanceA high proportion of the populations of a species occurs within the UK.

2. RarityMarine 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. DeclineAn 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 declineIt 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).

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

Applying ecological/scientific criteria 2.

“High natural biological diversity” (OSPAR) and “Biological diversity” (CBD)

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.

1. 2.

We had data for 120 well-surveyed areas and analysed it to identify biodiversity hotspots – only examples here: read the report for context

www.marlin.ac.uk

Hiscock, K. & Tyler-Walters, H. 2006. Identifying sensitivity in marine ecosystems: the MarLIN programme. Hydrobiologia, 555, 309-320.

Applying ecological/scientific criteria 3. “Sensitivity” (OSPAR) and “Vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity or slow recovery” (CBD)

Applying practical/design criteria 1.

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).

You need:1. Information on what occurs where;2. Targets for degree of replication.

• ‘Replication’ should be in biogeographical regions and of biotopes and ‘important’ species.

• Replication may not be possible for rare biotopes and species.

• ‘Important’ biotopes and species need to be represented in the mpa site series.

• For ‘representativity’, identification of biotopes needs to be to at least level 4 of the EUNIS classification.

“Representativity” and “Replication”

Applying practical/design criteria 2.

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.

“Maximum connectivity”

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.

5. Put your efforts into adding to our knowledge base, not crawling over methodologies and approaches (i.e. meetings!).

4. ‘Connectivity’ between mpa’s is unlikely for many species.

6. Always work in the ‘real world’ of scientific knowledge.

ThankyouThankyou

Returning to Plymouth from a dive in a possible Marine Conservation ZoneReturning to Plymouth from a dive in a possible Marine Conservation Zone

Presentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentations.htmlPresentation available from www.ukmpas.org/presentations.html