Large-scale conservation planning in a multinational marine environment: Cost matters

Explicitly including cost in marine conservation planning is essential for achieving feasible and efficient conservation outcomes. Yet, spatial priorities for marine conservation are still often based solely on biodiversity hotspots, species richness, and/or cumulative threat maps. This study aims to provide an approach for including cost when planning large-scale Marine Protected Area (MPA) networks that span multiple countries. Here, we explore the incorporation of cost in the complex setting of the Mediterranean Sea. In order to include cost in conservation prioritization, we developed surrogates that account for revenue from multiple marine sectors: commercial fishing, noncommercial fishing, and aquaculture. Such revenue can translate into an opportunity cost for the implementation of an MPA network. Using the software Marxan, we set conservation targets to protect 10% of the distribution of 77 threatened marine species in the Mediterranean Sea. We compared nine scenarios of opportunity cost by calculating the area and cost required to meet our targets. We further compared our spatial priorities with those that are considered consensus areas by several proposed prioritization schemes in the Mediterranean Sea, none of which explicitly considers cost. We found that for less than 10% of the Sea's area, our conservation targets can be achieved while incurring opportunity costs of less than 1%. In marine systems, we reveal that area is a poor cost surrogate and that the most effective surrogates are those that account for multiple sectors or stakeholders. Furthermore, our results indicate that including cost can greatly influence the selection of spatial priorities for marine conservation of threatened species. Although there are known limitations in multinational large-scale planning, attempting to devise more systematic and rigorous planning methods is especially critical given that collaborative conservation action is on the rise and global financial crisis restricts conservation investments

Emerging conservation challenges and prospects in an era of offshore hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation

Globally, extensive marine areas important for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem functioning are undergoing exploration and extraction of oil and natural gas resources. Such operations are expanding to previously inaccessible deep waters and other frontier regions, while conservation-related legislation and planning is often lacking. Conservation challenges arising from offshore hydrocarbon development are wide-ranging. These challenges include threats to ecosystems and marine species from oil spills, negative impacts on native biodiversity from invasive species colonizing drilling infrastructure, and increased political conflicts that can delay conservation actions. With mounting offshore operations, conservationists need to urgently consider some possible opportunities that could be leveraged for conservation. Leveraging options, as part of multi-billion dollar marine hydrocarbon operations, include the use of facilities and costly equipment of the deep and ultra-deep hydrocarbon industry for deep-sea conservation research and monitoring and establishing new conservation research, practice, and monitoring funds and environmental offsetting schemes. The conservation community, including conservation scientists, should become more involved in the earliest planning and exploration phases and remain involved throughout the operations so as to influence decision making and promote continuous monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystems. A prompt response by conservation professionals to offshore oil and gas developments can mitigate impacts of future decisions and actions of the industry and governments. New environmental decision support tools can be used to explicitly incorporate the impacts of hydrocarbon operations on biodiversity into marine spatial and conservation plans and thus allow for optimum trade-offs among multiple objectives, costs, and risks

Cross-boundary collaboration: Key to the conservation puzzle

Conservation science is advancing rapidly, yet the majority of research overlooks a key factor that can play a major role in shaping the outcomes of conservation initiatives: collaboration. Here, we review the importance, benefits and limitations of incorporating collaboration into conservation and specifically into systematic conservation planning, providing a general framework for considering collaboration in conservation planning. Recent work shows that cross-boundary collaboration can have both positive and negative impacts on the outcomes of conservation and management efforts for protected areas, ecosystems, threatened and invasive species. The feasibility of collaboration, its likely effects and associated trade-offs should therefore be explicitly incorporated into conservation science and planning. This will ensure that conservation decisions avoid wasted funding when collaboration is infeasible, promoting collaboration when the benefits outweigh the costs

Can satellite-based night lights be used for conservation? The case of nesting sea turtles in the Mediterranean

Artificial night lights pose a major threat to multiple species. However, this threat is often disregarded in conservation management and action because it is difficult to quantify its effect. Increasing availability of high spatial-resolution satellite images may enable us to better incorporate this threat into future work, particularly in highly modified ecosystems such as the coastal zone. In this study we examine the potential of satellite night light imagery to predict the distribution of the endangered loggerhead (Caretta caretto) and green (Chelonia mydas) sea turtle nests in the eastern Mediterranean coastline. Using remote sensing tools and high resolution data derived from the SAC-C satellite and the International Space Station, we examined the relationship between the long term spatial patterns of sea turtle nests and the intensity of night lights along Israel's entire Mediterranean coastline. We found that sea turtles nests are negatively related to night light intensity and are concentrated in darker sections along the coast. Our resulting GLMs showed that night lights were a significant factor for explaining the distribution of sea turtle nests. Other significant variables included: cliff presence, human population density and infrastructure. This study is one of the first to show that night lights estimated with satellite-based imagery can be used to help explain sea turtle nesting activity at a detailed resolution over large areas. This approach can facilitate the management of species affected by night lights, and will be particularly useful in areas that are inaccessible or where broad-scale prioritization of conservation action is required. Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Trawl Exposure and Protection of Seabed Fauna at Large Spatial Scales

Aim: Trawling is the most widespread direct human disturbance on the seabed. Knowledge of the extent and consequences of this disturbance is limited because large-scale distributions of seabed fauna are not well known. We map faunal distributions in the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and quantify the proportion of their abundance that occurs in areas 1) that are directly trawled and 2) where legislation permanently prohibits trawling—defined as percentage exposure or protection, respectively. Our approach includes developing a method that integrates data from disparate seabed surveys to spatially expand predicted benthos distributions. Location: Australia. Methods : We collate data from 18 seabed surveys to map the distribution of seabed invertebrates (benthos) in nine regions. Our approach combines data from multiple surveys, groups taxa within taxonomic classes and uses Random Forests to predict spatial abundance distributions of benthos groups from environmental variables. Exposure and protection of benthos groups were quantified by mapping their predicted abundance distributions against the footprint of trawling and legislated boundaries of marine reserves and fishery closures. Results: Trawling is currently prohibited from more area of Australia's EEZ (58%) than is trawled (<5%). Across 134 benthos groups, 96% had greater protection of abundance than exposure. The mean trawl exposure of benthos-group abundance was 7%, compared to mean protection of 38%, whereas the mean abundance neither trawled nor protected was 55%. Fishery closures covered 19% less study area than marine reserves, but overlapped with a higher proportion (5% more) of benthos-group abundance. Main Conclusions: This study provides the most extensive quantitative assessment of the current exposure of Australia's benthos to trawling. Further, it highlights the contribution of fishery closures to marine conservation. These results help identify regions and taxa that are at greatest potential risk from trawling and support managers to achieve balance between conservation and sustainable industries in marine ecosystems

Trawl impacts on the relative status of biotic communities of seabed sedimentary habitats in 24 regions worldwide

Bottom trawling is widespread globally and impacts seabed habitats. However, risks from trawling remain unquantified at large scales in most regions. We address these issues by synthesizing evidence on the impacts of different trawl-gear types, seabed recovery rates, and spatial distributions of trawling intensity in a quantitative indicator of biotic status (relative amount of pretrawling biota) for sedimentary habitats, where most bottom-trawling occurs, in 24 regions worldwide. Regional average status relative to an untrawled state (=1) was high (>0.9) in 15 regions, but 0.8. These assessments are first order, based on parameters estimated with uncertainty from meta-analyses; we recommend regional analyses to refine parameters for local specificity. Nevertheless, our results are sufficiently robust to highlight regions needing more effective management to reduce exploitation and improve stock sustainability and seabed environmental status—while also showing seabed status was high (>0.95) in regions where catches of trawled fish stocks meet accepted benchmarks for sustainable exploitation, demonstrating that environmental benefits accrue from effective fisheries management. Furthermore, regional seabed status was related to the proportional area swept by trawling, enabling preliminary predictions of regional status when only the total amount of trawling is known. This research advances seascape-scale understanding of trawl impacts in regions around the world, enables quantitative assessment of sustainability risks, and facilitates implementation of an ecosystem approach to trawl fisheries management globally

Selection of indicators for assessing and managing the impacts of bottom trawling on seabed habitats

Bottom trawl fisheries are the most widespread\ua0source of anthropogenic physical disturbance to seabed habitats. Development of fisheries-, conservation- and ecosystem-based management strategies requires the selection of indicators of the impact of bottom trawling on the state of benthic biota. Many indicators have been proposed, but no rigorous test of a range of candidate indicators against nine commonly agreed criteria (concreteness, theoretical basis, public awareness, cost, measurement, historical data, sensitivity, responsiveness, specificity) has been performed. Here, we collated data from 41 studies that compared the benthic biota in trawled areas with those in control locations (that were either not trawled or trawled infrequently), examining seven potential indicators (numbers and biomass for individual taxa and whole communities, evenness, Shannon–Wiener diversity and species richness) to assess their performance against the set of nine criteria. The effects of trawling were stronger on whole-community numbers and biomass than for individual taxa. Species richness was also negatively affected by trawling but other measures of diversity were not. Community numbers and biomass met all criteria, taxa numbers and biomass and species richness satisfied most criteria, but evenness and Shannon–Wiener diversity did not respond to trawling and only met few criteria, and hence are not suitable state indicators of the effect of bottom trawling. Synthesis and applications. An evaluation of each candidate indicator against a commonly agreed suite of desirable properties coupled with the outputs of our meta-analysis showed that whole-community numbers of individuals and biomass are the most suitable indicators of bottom trawling impacts as they performed well on all criteria. Strengths of these indicators are that they respond strongly to trawling, relate directly to ecosystem functioning and are straightforward to measure. Evenness and Shannon–Wiener diversity are not responsive to trawling and unsuitable for the monitoring and assessment of bottom trawl impacts

Estimating the sustainability of towed fishing-gear impacts on seabed habitats: a simple quantitative risk assessment method applicable to data-limited fisheries

1. Impacts of bottom fishing, particularly trawling and dredging, on seabed (benthic) habitats are commonly perceived to pose serious environmental risks. Quantitative ecological risk assessment can be used to evaluate actual risks and to help guide the choice of management measures needed to meet sustainability objectives. 2. We develop and apply a quantitative method for assessing the risks to benthic habitats by towed bottom-fishing gears. The method is based on a simple equation for relative benthic status (RBS), derived by solving the logistic population growth equation for the equilibrium state. Estimating RBS requires only maps of fishing intensity and habitat type — and parameters for impact and recovery rates, which may be taken from meta-analyses of multiple experimental studies of towed-gear impacts. The aggregate status of habitats in an assessed region is indicated by the distribution of RBS values for the region. The application of RBS is illustrated for a tropical shrimp-trawl fishery. 3. The status of trawled habitats and their RBS value depend on impact rate (depletion per trawl), recovery rate and exposure to trawling. In the shrimp-trawl fishery region, gravel habitat was most sensitive, and though less exposed than sand or muddy-sand, was most affected overall (regional RBS=91% relative to un-trawled RBS=100%). Muddy-sand was less sensitive, and though relatively most exposed, was less affected overall (RBS=95%). Sand was most heavily trawled but least sensitive and least affected overall (RBS=98%). Region-wide, >94% of habitat area had >80% RBS because most trawling and impacts were confined to small areas. RBS was also applied to the region's benthic invertebrate communities with similar results. 4. Conclusions. Unlike qualitative or categorical trait-based risk assessments, the RBS method provides a quantitative estimate of status relative to an unimpacted baseline, with minimal requirements for input data. It could be applied to bottom-contact fisheries worldwide, including situations where detailed data on characteristics of seabed habitats, or the abundance of seabed fauna are not available. The approach supports assessment against sustainability criteria and evaluation of alternative management strategies (e.g. closed areas, effort management, gear modifications)

Global analysis of depletion and recovery of seabed biota after bottom trawling disturbance

Bottom trawling is the most widespread human activity affecting seabed habitats. Here, we collate all available data for experimental and comparative studies of trawling impacts on whole communities of seabed macroinvertebrates on sedimentary habitats and develop widely applicable methods to estimate depletion and recovery rates of biota after trawling. Depletion of biota and trawl penetration into the seabed are highly correlated. Otter trawls caused the least depletion, removing 6% of biota per pass and penetrating the seabed on average down to 2.4 cm, whereas hydraulic dredges caused the most depletion, removing 41% of biota and penetrating the seabed on average 16.1 cm. Median recovery times posttrawling (from 50 to 95% of unimpacted biomass) ranged between 1.9 and 6.4 y. By accounting for the effects of penetration depth, environmental variation, and uncertainty, the models explained much of the variability of depletion and recovery estimates from single studies. Coupled with large-scale, high-resolution maps of trawling frequency and habitat, our estimates of depletion and recovery rates enable the assessment of trawling impacts on unprecedented spatial scales