A Caribbean-wide survey of marine reserves: spatial coverage and attributes of effectiveness

Fully-protected marine reserves can function at several spatial scales, from a single area encompassing few habitats, to local networks of many habitats, to large-scale networks connected by larval dispersal. However, the amount, spatial distribution, and associated administrative attributes of Caribbean marine reserves are collectively unknown. We compiled information on reserves from 21 countries in order to 1) assemble a spatial framework to aid development of networks of reserves at the most effective spatial scales, and 2) aid policy makers in establishing reserves that are science-based and possess optimal management attributes. Since 1961 there have been over 50 reserves established in the Caribbean (an additional 30 in Bermuda) with the rate of implementation increasing since the mid 1980’s. Most reserves are small (\u3c 1,200 ha) and few contain the range of habitats necessary for protecting species through their ontogeny. Habitats are often not fully characterized, and the role of reserves in protecting and networking different habitats cannot be ascertained. Reserves are distributed throughout the region, with the highest density in Mesoamerica; but significant geographic gaps exist. It is unlikely that reserve-enhanced larval production significantly networks populations on a regional basis, although this may occur subregionally (e.g., Mesoamerica). Less than 20% of the reserves were scored as fully compliant, but half offer potentially significant levels of protection

Improving Applications of Science in MPA Design and Management: Workshop Report

This workshop was convened as part of the Symposium on Caribbean Marine Protected Areas: Practical Approaches to Achieve Economic and Conservation Goals, held at the 54th Annual Meeting of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Providenciales, Turks and Caicos Islands, 12–17 November 2001. The workshop used the scientific theme of the MPA Symposium, “Connectivity at Multiple Spatial Scales”, as a starting point to identify existing and underutilized tools that can improve the application of science to MPA management. The spatial themes of the earlier session, crossshelf habitat connectivity among demersal life stages and oceanic connectivity among larval stages, were applied to corresponding administrative themes within several sub-discussions. Efforts to unify often distinct technical or administrative challenges were encouraged, with an eye on practical recommendations. Over thirty attendees from ten countries and a wide range of institutions examined issues at the interface of scientific research and practical MPA management. Participants were asked to identify positive and negative trends in our scientific knowledge and its application to the design, implementation, and assessment of MPAs. Priority areas for filling gaps were also identified. Ultimately, we combined the Negatives section with the Gaps to be Filled section, since the topics arising within each were often directly connected. The group agreed upfront to focus primarily on no-take areas (= marine fishery reserves), although, discussions of reserves within the context of larger, multi-use zoned MPAs often arose