WWF Cover photo - Soufriere Marine Management Association ...

species closures where fishers continue catching other species in the same area, the temptation to take a few‘forbidden’ species may sometimes undermine closure effectiveness. This was a problem in invertebrategleaning fisheries in Fiji (Tawake and Albersberg 2001).What these and other examples indicate is that it is important to act to protect species before they havedeclined too far. It is better to use reserves to help sustain production rather than relying on them as a rebuildingtool when things go wrong.Finally, people are the key factor in whether or not reserves work. Without support and compliancefrom fishers nothing can happen. Fiske (1992) identified lack of involvement by artisanal fishers in efforts toestablish the La Parguera National Marine Sanctuary in Puerto Rico as one of the main reasons why the proposalfailed (although a reserve has since been established there). In California, USA, a design for a statewide networkof marine reserves was abandoned in 2001 and a new process begun due to lack of input from fishers early on(MPA news, April 2002). In the Pacific, the Guam Territorial Seashore Park was selected and designed by theGovernment of Guam with very limited public consultation. The community wasn’t involved in managementdecisions once the park was established and it suffers from poor funding and enforcement. Gilman (1997) calls ita “paper park” and suggests that only by involving user groups in management, decision-making and educationwill the park succeed. Conversely, in the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, San Andres Archipelago, westernCaribbean, efforts were made from the outset to fully involve all sectors of the local fishing community inconsultation and planning. This has resulted in a high level of support (M. Howard pers. comm., Howard 2001,Howard et al. 2001). In a review of marine protected areas in the northwestern Mediterranean, Francour et al.(2001) noted that the better the initial consultations were with all user groups the fewer subsequent conflicts andmanagement problems arose.12. What advantages do reserves have over existing fishery management tools?Some commentators ask the question, why use marine reserves when there are other fishery management toolsavailable? Surely it is better, they argue, to use tried and tested methods rather than something new like reserves.Hastings and Botsford (1999) showed mathematically that marine reserves can be designed to achieve the samelevel of catches as traditional effort controls on fisheries. However, they point out that reserves also offer otheradvantages over traditional management measures. Stockhausen and Lipcius (2001) used a population model tocompare effects of different reserve configurations (covering 20% of the total habitat) and effort reduction (by20%) on lobsters in Exuma Sound, Bahamas. They found that various performance measures (mean catch, larvalproduction and population growth rate) ranked strategies from best to worst in the order (1) single large reserve,(2) several small reserves, (3) reduced effort, and (4) no management.Sladek Nowlis (2000), again taking a population modeling approach, showed that reserves performedbetter than temporary closures or minimum size limits on fish. Under the range of conditions modeled, theygenerally produced greater long-term catches with less restriction of fishing activities than would be necessarywith other management measures.Reserves offer many advantages over existing tools. They protect sensitive habitats from disturbanceand damage by fishing gears such as trawls. Although closures to mobile fishing gears can achieve this, theylack the breadth of protection that reserves can afford. For example, reserves prevent by-catch mortality bypreventing by-catch altogether. They eliminate ghost fishing by lost or discarded gear. They prevent impacts onpopulations by vessels high grading catches (discarding lower value species to load up with high value species).They foster development of natural, extended age structures in populations, something that effort reduction alonecannot do. Reserves may also offer greater protection against political interference in fishery management, sincepoliticians setting catch levels may be less willing to reopen marine reserves than they are to overrule other kindsof conservation measure proposed by fishery scientists (Roberts 2000a).Reserves also provide refuges for species that cannot persist in areas that continue to be fished. Forexample, the barndoor skate (Raja laevis) has nearly disappeared throughout its northeast Atlantic range due toby-catch in trawls targetting other species (Casey and Myers 1998). However, there has recently been evidencefrom experimental catches in closed areas of Georges Bank of a good recruitment of juvenile skate to theprotected areas (S. Murawksi pers. comm.).By protecting intact, undisturbed ecosystems, reserves also provide benchmarks against which theeffects of fishing can be judged. Such information can improve fishery management, for example by providingbetter estimates of natural or fishing mortality rates. In California, protected populations in two reserves in theChannel Islands allowed a better evaluation of the dive fishery for warty sea cucumber (Parasticopusparvimensis) (Schroeter et al. 2001). They revealed that in 3-6 years, fishing reduced densities of sea cucumbersby 33-83%. Analyses of conventional CPUE data showed no declines and even a significant increase over timeat one island.Ultimately, it is not a question of whether reserves are better than other management measures. Instead,we should ask how we can combine these tools to greatest effect. At one extreme, some fisheries could be19