the humboldt current system of northern and central chile - figema

MARTIN THIEL ET AL.target species, largely ignoring habitats, ecological interactions and other important ecosystemcomponents (e.g., species dispersal). Although management areas can provide nursery grounds fortarget species (e.g., the Chilean abalone, Concholepas concholepas, keyhole limpets Fissurella spp.and the red sea urchin Loxechinus albus), this approach is often criticised for its weakness inproviding a long-term ecological and economic viability and uncertainty in its efficiency (NRC2001). The establishment of MPAs has proven to be a useful tool to achieve conservation andpreservation goals (e.g., resources, communities, habitats), either as no-take MPAs or multiple-useMPAs (MUMPAs) (NRC 2001). Among the different tools existing in the Chilean legislation forprotecting coastal areas, two types of no-take MPAs (marine reserves and parks) were foreseen inthe law since 1989 but have only recently been established (Morales & Ponce 1997, Fernández &Castilla 2005). According to the Chilean laws, marine reserves are not focused on ecosystemprotection but rather on exploited resources and their habitats and eventually may allow partialextractions if stocks reach very high levels of abundance. Three marine reserves are located between18°S and 41°S (Table 6): La Rinconada to preserve a genetic stock of the scallop Argopectenpurpuratus and Isla Choros-Damas and Isla Chañaral for allowing the recovery of several overexploitedbenthic invertebrates (and their habitats). Furthermore, two MUMPAs, Isla Grande deAtacama and Lafken Mapu Lahual, have been created by the National Environmental Agency(CONAMA) with international private funding (GEF) as two of the three Chilean MUMPAs. Incontrast to the marine reserves, these MUMPAs aim at the conservation of biodiversity integratingsocioeconomic interests by creating not only no-take areas, but also areas where fishery and outdooractivities (e.g., diving, ecotourism) are permitted. While no-take zones have not yet been establishedin the MUMPA Isla Grande de Atacama, they have recently been identified (C. Gaymer et al.unpublished data) and will be declared in the near future. Finally, a small no-take MPA is locatedat Las Cruces, mainly for scientific purposes. Although very few MPAs exist in Chile, initiativesfor conservation are facilitated by the Chilean law, which established an exclusive zone for artisanalfisheries within 5 nautical miles from the shore (e.g., prohibits trawling).The MPAs Isla Choros-Damas, Isla Chañaral and Isla Grande de Atacama in northern Chilehave been subjectively chosen through the use of expert criteria, based on the presence of someimportant ecological communities representing the HCS. The subtidal zone of these three MPAsis characterised by kelp beds of Lessonia trabeculata, L. nigrescens and Macrocystis integrifoliaand several invertebrate populations overexploited during decades, and now vulnerable, such as theChilean abalone Concholepas concholepas and the red sea urchin Loxechinus albus (i.e., extractionprohibited). Moreover, these MPAs are the habitat of some emblematic and/or endangered species,such as the bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus, the sea otter Lontra felina, the Humboldt penguinSpheniscus humboldti and the Peruvian diving petrel Pelecanoides garnotii, and Isla Grande deAtacama is the southernmost site where the wedge-rumped storm-petrel Oceanodroma tethyskelsalli occurs. Biological corridors (Kaufman et al. 2004) permitting those species along withother seabirds to travel between these three MPAs are not included in the present MPA design.Additional MPAs between the marine reserves and the MUMPA would help to ensure undisturbedmigration of marine birds and mammals. Ultimately, given the use of both terrestrial and marineenvironments by some species (e.g., Humboldt penguins) (Fariña et al. 2003b, Ellis et al. 2006),the selection of priority sites for conservation/preservation should integrate both environments,looking for common hot spots that would increase efficiency and reduce conservation costs.MPAs offer a management tool to preserve hot spots of native species diversity; however, thesehot spots can be strongly affected by invasion of exotic species which could compromise theeffectiveness of MPAs (Byers 2005, Klinger et al. 2006). Introduction of invasive species in Chilebecomes a serious concern with the increase of aquaculture (Castilla et al. 2005a). The Isla Grandede Atacama MPA is south of a bay (Bahia Inglesa) where intense scallop culture takes place andwhere the highest density of the exotic seaweed Codium fragile for the Chilean coast has been296