Beyond Marine Reserves: Exploring the Approach of Selecting Areas where Fishing Is Permitted, Rather than Prohibited

Background:\ud Marine populations have been declining at a worrying rate, due in large part to fishing pressures. The challenge is to secure a future for marine life while minimizing impacts on fishers and fishing communities.\ud \ud Methods and Principal Findings:\ud Rather than selecting areas where fishing is banned – as is usually the case with spatial management – we assess the concept of designating areas where fishing is permitted. We use spatial catch statistics for thirteen commercial fisheries on Canada’s west coast to determine the minimum area that would be needed to maintain a pre-ascribed target percentage of current catches. We found that small reductions in fisheries yields, if strategically allocated, could result in large unfished areas that are representative of biophysical regions and habitat types, and have the potential to achieve remarkable conservation gains.\ud \ud Conclusions:\ud Our approach of selecting fishing areas instead of reserves could help redirect debate about the relative values that society places on conservation and extraction, in a framework that could gain much by losing little. Our ideas are intended to promote discussions about the current status quo in fisheries management, rather than providing a definitive solution

A synthesis of the prevalence and drivers of non-compliance in marine protected areas

Non-compliance regularly negates the effectiveness of marine protected areas (MPAs) worldwide. Understanding and addressing non-compliance is critical given continued efforts to establish MPAs to meet international milestones (e.g., Aichi targets). We conducted a literature review and meta-analysis to address five key questions and research gaps for MPAs: 1) how is non-compliance best measured? 2) what are common drivers of non-compliance? 3) what is the overall prevalence of non-compliance? 4) how frequently is ecological failure of MPAs attributed to non-compliance? and 5) are there measurable management impacts on regulated fishing in MPAs (i.e., effective reduction of fishing)? We found 151 papers that had some focus on non-compliant resource extraction in MPAs and 96 that quantified it. Insufficient enforcement was the most cited driver of non-compliance, followed by several socio-economic drivers including lack of awareness, livelihood/economic gain, social norms, and ineffective governance. Prohibited fishing in MPAs was often reduced compared to outside areas, as shown by our meta-analysis. However, we found frequent reports and measures of non-compliance globally, and many cases of failed ecological performance attributed primarily to non-compliance (57% of 67 relevant studies). Overall, our synthesis demonstrates that non-compliance continues to be a prevalent issue for MPAs. Reducing non-compliance and ensuring effective MPAs will rely on continuous evaluation of non-compliance to inform adaptive management, as well as addressing the complex, interrelated drivers that arise throughout MPA planning, establishment, and management

A social-ecological approach to conservation planning: embedding social considerations

Many conservation plans remain unimplemented, in part because of insufficient consideration of the social processes that influence conservation decisions. Complementing social considerations with an integrated understanding of the ecology of a region can result in a more complete conservation approach. We suggest that linking conservation planning to a social-ecological systems (SES) framework can lead to a more thorough understanding of human-environment interactions and more effective integration of social considerations. By characterizing SES as a set of subsystems, and their interactions with each other and with external factors, the SES framework can improve our understanding of the linkages between social and ecological influences on the environment. Using this framework can help to identify socially and ecologically focused conservation actions that will benefit ecosystems and human communities, and assist in the development of more consistent evidence for evaluating conservation actions by comparing conservation case studies

Assessing Trade-Offs in Large Marine Protected Areas

Large marine protected areas (LMPAs) are increasingly being established and have a high profile in marine conservation. LMPAs are expected to achieve multiple objectives, and because of their size are postulated to avoid trade-offs that are common in smaller MPAs. However, evaluations across multiple outcomes are lacking. We used a systematic approach to code several social and ecological outcomes of 12 LMPAs. We found evidence of three types of trade-offs: trade-offs between different ecological resources (supply trade-offs); trade-offs between ecological resource conditions and the well-being of resource users (supply-demand trade-offs); and trade-offs between the well-being outcomes of different resource users (demand trade-offs). We also found several divergent outcomes that were attributed to influences beyond the scope of the LMPA. We suggest that despite their size, trade-offs can develop in LMPAs and should be considered in planning and design. LMPAs may improve their performance across multiple social and ecological objectives if integrated with larger-scale conservation efforts. © 2018 Davies et al

Addressing Criticisms of Large-Scale Marine Protected Areas

Designated large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs, 100,000 or more square kilometers) constitute over two-thirds of the approximately 6.6% of the ocean and approximately 14.5% of the exclusive economic zones within marine protected areas. Although LSMPAs have received support among scientists and conservation bodies for wilderness protection, regional ecological connectivity, and improving resilience to climate change, there are also concerns. We identified 10 common criticisms of LSMPAs along three themes: (1) placement, governance, and management; (2) political expediency; and (3) social–ecological value and cost. Through critical evaluation of scientific evidence, we discuss the value, achievements, challenges, and potential of LSMPAs in these arenas. We conclude that although some criticisms are valid and need addressing, none pertain exclusively to LSMPAs, and many involve challenges ubiquitous in management. We argue that LSMPAs are an important component of a diversified management portfolio that tempers potential losses, hedges against uncertainty, and enhances the probability of achieving sustainably managed oceans

Vignette 23: Indigenous Management Systems Can Promote More Sustainable Salmon Fisheries in the Salish Sea

Indigenous peoples of the Northern Pacific Rim have harvested salmon for more than 10,000 years, and Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) form the foundation of social-ecological systems encompassing communities from California to Kamchatka and Northern Japan. Through continuous placed-based interdependence with salmon, Indigenous societies formed deliberate and well-honed systems of salmon management. These systems promoted the sustained productivity of salmon fisheries. In Canada and the United States, Indigenous sovereignty and resource stewardship were forcibly disrupted by colonial government authority. Despite the destructive impacts of colonization, Indigenous culture and knowledge are resurgent in Canada and the United States. Indigenous fishing technologies and management systems are being documented and reinvigorated. Systems of Indigenous salmon management can support long- term opportunities for equitable and sustainable harvest of salmon across western North America

Localization of type 1 diabetes susceptibility to the MHC class I genes HLA-B and HLA-A

The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) on chromosome 6 is associated with susceptibility to more common diseases than any other region of the human genome, including almost all disorders classified as autoimmune. In type 1 diabetes the major genetic susceptibility determinants have been mapped to the MHC class II genes HLA-DQB1 and HLA-DRB1 (refs 1-3), but these genes cannot completely explain the association between type 1 diabetes and the MHC region. Owing to the region's extreme gene density, the multiplicity of disease-associated alleles, strong associations between alleles, limited genotyping capability, and inadequate statistical approaches and sample sizes, which, and how many, loci within the MHC determine susceptibility remains unclear. Here, in several large type 1 diabetes data sets, we analyse a combined total of 1,729 polymorphisms, and apply statistical methods - recursive partitioning and regression - to pinpoint disease susceptibility to the MHC class I genes HLA-B and HLA-A (risk ratios >1.5; Pcombined = 2.01 × 10-19 and 2.35 × 10-13, respectively) in addition to the established associations of the MHC class II genes. Other loci with smaller and/or rarer effects might also be involved, but to find these, future searches must take into account both the HLA class II and class I genes and use even larger samples. Taken together with previous studies, we conclude that MHC-class-I-mediated events, principally involving HLA-B*39, contribute to the aetiology of type 1 diabetes. ©2007 Nature Publishing Group

Advancing social equity in and through marine conservation

Substantial efforts and investments are being made to increase the scale and improve the effectiveness of marine conservation globally. Though it is mandated by international law and central to conservation policy, less attention has been given to how to operationalize social equity in and through the pursuit of marine conservation. In this article, we aim to bring greater attention to this topic through reviewing how social equity can be better integrated in marine conservation policy and practice. Advancing social equity in marine conservation requires directing attention to: recognition through acknowledgment and respect for diverse peoples and perspectives; fair distribution of impacts through maximizing benefits and minimizing burdens; procedures through fostering participation in decision-making and good governance; management through championing and supporting local involvement and leadership; the environment through ensuring the efficacy of conservation actions and adequacy of management to ensure benefits to nature and people; and the structural barriers to and institutional roots of inequity in conservation. We then discuss the role of various conservation organizations in advancing social equity in marine conservation and identify the capacities these organizations need to build. We urge the marine conservation community, including governments, non-governmental organizations and donors, to commit to the pursuit of socially equitable conservation