WWF Cover photo - Soufriere Marine Management Association ...

Unfortunately, there have been few well-studied cases like that of the Zuwai crab, and until recently,the best evidence that reserves enhance catches in surrounding fisheries has been from more localized studiesdocumenting increased catch per unit effort (CPUE) close to reserve boundaries. For example, McClanahan andKaunda-Arara (1996) and McClanahan and Mangi (2000) showed that trap fishers close to the Mombasa MarineNational Park in Kenya enjoy three times greater catch per trap than those further away, despite higher trapdensities close to the reserve. These fishing spots are so lucrative they are now reserved by informal agreementfor the most senior fishers (Rodwell 2001).Changes in fishing patterns, like that of the Mombasa fishers, are often the first indication that reservesare beginning to work, although the evidence is often anecdotal. For example, lobster traps ring the boundariesof the Leigh Marine Reserve in New Zealand (Ballantine pers. comm.), the Bicheno reserve in Tasmania (N.Barrett pers. comm.), and the Anacapa Reserve in the California Channel Islands (R. Fujita pers. comm.).Ramos-Espla and McNeill (1994) reported that catches of key species around the Isla Tabarca Marine Reserve inSpain were up by 50-85% over pre-protection levels, although they did not provide supporting data in this paper.In the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in Australia the Shelburne Bay Cross Shelf Transect was closed to fishingin 1988. In 1990 trawl fishermen interviewed about the closure reported increased catches through ‘fishing-theline’,as fishing close to reserve boundaries is called. Compliance with the closure was reported to be about 80%and some of the fishers interviewed were in support of permanent closures (Shorthouse 1990). However,quantitative evidence of fishing-the-line is beginning to be collected. For example, Bohnsack and Ault (2002)found lobster traps set preferentially close to boundaries of the Sambos Ecological Reserve in the Florida Keys.Satellite transponders on boats in the New England scallop fishery have shown vessel tracks clustered close tothe borders of large areas closed to groundfish trawling (Murawksi et al. 2000).Fishers would presumably not waste effort fishing at higher intensities close to reserve boundaries ifthey were not rewarded with better catches but few studies have yet quantified spillover catches. Kelly et al.(2002) studied catches from one spiny lobster fisherman fishing around the Leigh Marine Reserve, in NewZealand. His catches were more variable around the borders of the reserve than those in areas further away, butlarge catches were more frequent. On average, catches from close to the reserve were similar to landings fromother sites, despite the shallow habitat near the reserve being generally less productive for lobsters, suggestingthat the reserve was supplying this fishery.Several studies have recently confirmed predictions that marine reserves can increase overall catches. InSt. Lucia, Roberts et al. (2001a) found that in five years, CPUE of large fish traps increased 46% and small trapsby 90% in fishing grounds around a network of four reserves in the Soufriere Marine Management Area. Sincenumbers of fishers and overall fishing effort did not change significantly over the course of the study, thissuggests a greater total yield, despite contraction of the fishing grounds to two-thirds of their former extent. Avery similar effect of reserves has been seen in Egypt around a network of small reserves near the settlement ofNabq in the southern Gulf of Aqaba. There, CPUE of the trammel net fishery has increased by 66% in five yearsof protection, from 0.79 kg net -1 h -1 to 1.31 kg net -1 h -1 . Underwater visual censuses showed correspondingincreases in stocks of target fish in the reserves (Galal et al. 2002). Interestingly, the Nabq area was relativelylightly fished compared to many places where reserves have been established (Roberts and Polunin 1992). Thesereserves have promoted build-up of populations of larger predatory species, including groupers (Serranidae),emperors (Lethrinidae) and snappers (Lutjanidae). Such fish are often rare and may respond slowly to protectionin places that have been intensively exploited (Roberts 2000b).In the Philippines, CPUE of the hook and line fishery around the 0.74km 2 Apo Island reserve increasedten-fold over twenty years of protection, from 0.13-0.17 kg person -1 hour –1 in 1980/1 to 1-2 kg person -1 hour –1in 1997-2001 (Maypa et al. 2002). Total yield of the Apo Island fishery is among the highest in the Philippinesand has been stable for the last 15 years at 15-30 tonnes.km -2 .year -1 . (Although CPUE increased, total yield didnot due to reducing effort in other associated fisheries, such as drift gill nets (Maypa et al. 2002).)Experience from Georges Bank in the Gulf of Maine shows that fishery closures can work at muchlarger scales. In 1994, in an effort to stem chronic declines in groundfish stocks, three large areas totalling17,000km 2 were closed to all fishing gears that target these species, including gears like scallop dredges thatmight catch them incidentally or damage their habitat. Murawski et al. (2000) judged the closed areas a majorsuccess. They significantly reduced fishing mortality of depleted groundfish stocks, with clear increases inabundance and size of haddock and flounder. Georges Bank cod stocks are also creeping up, in part because ofthe closures, but also due to a package of gear and effort restrictions that complement them (NEFSC 2001).These improvements are beginning to have an impact on fish catches. At a recent meeting of fishers andscientists in Oregon, a Cape Cod fisherman described how prior to the closures, he had to steam 70 miles oneway for a day’s catch of around 270kg of cod, but these days he travels just 30 miles toward the edge of a closedarea and catches 500kg.Groundfish gains aside, the most obvious benefit of the closures has been the dramatic recovery of thefishery for scallops, Placopecten magellanicus. After five years of protection their populations rebounded to 9 to14 times the density of legal size scallops in fished areas (Murawski et al. 2000), and catches in surroundingareas increased. The closures have rehabilitated one of the most valuable fisheries in New England.12