MARINE PROTECTED AREAS:
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN CREATION AND MANAGEMENT
The establishment of a system of marine protected areas (MPAs) has the
same purposes as that of protected areas on dry land: to maintain vital
ecological processes indispensable to the existence of human beings and
all other species; to foster sustainable exploitation of species and ecosystems
over the long term; and to conserve biological diversity.
There are over 3,000 MPAs in the world today. The majority are in the
Torrid Zone, mostly at reefs. The middle latitudes have many fewer MPAs,
though the area of each is usually larger. Most reserves are situated
near the shore; some include dry land, others do not extend beyond the
high tide mark.
The new MPA concept is less concerned with the local preservation of
the most valuable or vulnerable coasts than with the creation of multifunctional
MPA systems; the idea resembles that behind the networks of protected
land areas, although the creation of MPA systems is grossly overdue. The
integrity of the Ocean’s global ecosystem and the “openness” of its ecological
processes have long been considered an insurmountable obstacle to the
introduction of protection measures. In truth, any marine ecosystem is
much less isolated from the surrounding ones than are terrestrial ecosystems.
The currents link areas in the Ocean that are hundreds and thousands of
miles apart. Many marine fish, mammals and even invertebrate species migrate
over large distances; the larvae of benthal creatures, having come to
life in one place, settle many miles away. Given these conditions, the
establishment of protected marine areas seemed useless. Moreover, marine
reserves are powerless to prevent, for example, the pollution from oil
spills hundreds of miles away. Gradually, however, it has become obvious
that, aside from the global impact on the Ocean’s ecosystem, many areas
suffer from local disturbances. The development of international tourism
has increased the recreational wear-and-tear on coral reefs and atolls.
Collectors have endangered not only many attractive shellfish species,
but also the existence of the reefs themselves– some of the most
visited cays are in danger of disappearing altogether. On the other hand,
reserves have managed to cope effectively with such disturbances as coastal
zone construction, channel sweeping, and dredging.
Marine reserves tend to be created in areas around biological stations
set aside for scientific research or in recreational zones that have been
accorded the status of a national or local park. Often protection is arranged
with the aim of limiting or regulating fishing and other kinds of marine
exploitation. Depending upon the reserve’s aims, the protection status
and the size range from no-access reserves with areas of much less than
a square kilometre to water areas with limited industrial exploitation
over hundreds of miles. When MPAs were first being set up, the smaller
ones were more popular: small reserves with strict protection status were
established within coral reefs. Their objective was to preserve typical
marine ecosystems undisturbed. At the same time, marine parks were created
along shoals in the tropical and subtropical belts, areas attractive to
tourists. The significant increase in the number of scuba divers over
the last ten years has made the marine parks valuable not only for conservation,
but also for the economy of coastal states. The development of underwater
tourism has become a major source of income. For example, the number of
tourists who visit the Gulf of Aqaba Gulf (Egypt) every year has increased
15-fold since 1988. Services in the area have increased to meet demand,
and are continuing to do so. In 1998, the Gulf of Aqaba could accommodate
a total of 15,000 tourists: that number will have jumped to 160,000 by
2017 in anticipation of the growing influx of fishing and underwater sportsmen.
Meanwhile, other kinds of exploitation along the coast are limited. The
entire coast of Egypt has thus been turned into a system of marine and
coastal reserves with a combined area of over 8,000 square kilometres,
more than 1,600 square kilometres of which is water (Pearson, Shehata,
1998).
In recent years, the creation of large reserves with reasonable limitations
has become more and more popular. Multiple use areas with common administration
and zoning of the water area have been created not only for recreational
purposes, but because this is the most effective way of managing in-shore
resources. Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is a prime example of this sort
of multiple use marine area.
The Great Barrier Reef’s common administration controls a complex system
of protected marine areas, including small no-access reserves and large
water areas extending over hundreds of miles with limitations for specific
kinds of exploitation. The estimated income from tourism in the park amounts
to roughly 1 billion Australian dollars a year, while the income from
commercial fishing is only a fourth of that. The overall area of the Great
Barrier Reef’s system of MPAs is 350,000 square kilometres. Fishing is
prohibited over 16,398 square kilometres as is trawling over
an additional 88,670 square kilometres (Tanzer, 1998). Elsewhere,
fishing is permitted and regulated in accordance with the zoning.
The successful experience of Australia, as well as several other countries,
has shown MPA systems to be a far more effective mechanism of conservation
than separate MPAs with stricter protection status. This is why specialists
have begun focusing on setting up MPA systems rather than separate reserves.
This new focus was reflected at the official level in the resolution of
the IV World Conservation Congress in Colorado (1997). The resolution
appealed to all states to note the need for adequate MPA systems in their
territorial waters.
Marine reserves, as a separate field in nature conservation, first appeared
in the ‘60s. At the First World Parks Congress in Seattle in 1962, one
of the resolutions was devoted to the need for the creation of marine
parks all over the world.
Four years later, a special Symposium on Marine Parks was held for the
first time within the framework of the international Pacific Scientific
Congress (Marine Parks, 1966). Note that this Congress was held in Japan,
the first country to have a developed system of marine reserves comprising
all the types of in-shore ecosystems. Japan’s first marine parks were
set up in an effort to organize the recreational load and provide the
public access to the most interesting and picturesque site in an environmentally
viable way. Reserves were also created in areas of traditional offshore
industries, primarily pearl fishery (Okada, 1966).
In other countries, too, the first MPAs were created primarily for recreational
purposes. Over time, however, it became clear that even small MPAs help
to improve the local fishery. MPAs can serve as breeding grounds for roundfish
populations. In the tropical zone, especially in the reefs, the heterogeneity
and mosaic structure of the ecosystems substantially increases the yield
even when the reserves are small (i.e. less than a square kilometre).
The influence of such reserves – the increase in the roundfish stock and
the size of individual fish – is noticeable over areas ten times greater
than that of the actual MPAs (King, Faasil, 1998). In the boreal latitudes
and middle latitudes, small reserves are less effective since the main
types of communities occupy large territories and similar benthal areas
extend over tens of miles. This is why most reserves today are situated
in the Torrid Zone. The experience of the first MPAs in the middle latitudes,
however, suggests that it would make sense to extend the current network
of MPAs in the middle and boreal latitudes.
Canada’s Marine National Parks system covers the different types of coastal
and marine ecosystems in the non-tropical region of the Northern Hemisphere
in the most representative way (Marine National… 1986). The experience
of European countries – the creation of the international Waddenzee Marine
Reserve in the North Sea – has been equally successful: this reserve allows
the governments of Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands to carry coordinate
the management of in-shore shoal resources. This area is traditionally
used for invertebrate fishing, primarily for shrimp and mussels. Long
use of bottom trawls has considerably disturbed the benthal ecosystem
and disrupted the resource base. The coordinated efforts of national reserves
have substantially reduced the fishing loads and optimised exploitation
(Enemark et al., 1998;Enemark, pers. comm.).
In recent years, several attempts have been made to generalize the experience
of MPAs over the last four decades (Kelleher, Kenchington, 1991; Kelleher
et al., 1995; Bryant et al., 1998). In 1998, a special issue of the Parks
journal (IUCN bulletin) was entirely devoted to the marine reserves.
On the basis of the data collected, Graham Kelleher and Richard Kenchington
(Kelleher, Kenchington, 1991) attempted to generalize the purposes of
establishing the MPA systems.
The theoretical research and its practical application in this field
allows us to summarize the main approaches to creation of MPAs, independently
of geographical and political conditions in the country itself.
The establishment of a national system of MPAs would promote the following:
protection and management of parts of marine ecosystems, thus ensuring
their continued existence and preserving their genetic diversity;
conservation of rare and endangered species and populations, as well
as of habitats vital to their survival;
protection and management of marine territories necessary for the
existence of the industrially valuable species;
sustainable and complex exploitation of in-shore resources;
preservation and management of historic and cultural sites, picturesque
seaside landscapes and estuaries for present and future generations;
use of marine ecosystems for educational purposes and tourism;
scientific research in ecosystems that are undisturbed or under controlled
anthropogenic pressure.
The following basic principles should be respected in creating MPA systems:
ensuring the welfare of those people whose interests are affected
by the creation of MPAs;
preventing industrial activities outside the MPAs when they endanger
life inside the reserves;
combining the necessary protection status with various industrial
activities that do not conflict with the MPA’s main objectives;
researching and monitoring the effects of industrial activities, including
the explicit and implicit results of industrial activities in nearby
areas.
To establish a national system of MPAs, one must:
revise the existing protected territories (is the existing network
representative?);
estimate the impact of existing and planned industrial exploitation
of marine ecosystems;
anticipate conflicting possibilities for exploitation of marine ecosystem
resources;
identify possible locations for new MPAs and priorities of their establishment;
research the extent and nature of the local population’s dependence
on coastal resources;
inform the local population so that it could support the establishment
of new MPAs;
determine the resources (including the financial ones) necessary to
establish, protect and maintain the MPA.
Kelleher and Kenchington have also suggested a system of criteria for
choosing areas for MPA networks. Unfortunately, these criteria can be
applied only to the choice of separate protected areas rather than to
the system as a whole.
The criteria (from Kelleher, Kenchington, 1991) are as follows:
1. “Naturality”. The chosen areas, wherever possible, should be
undisturbed by the previous industrial activities.
2. Biogeographical criterium. Areas that are typical of the biogeographical
zone or the habitats of rare or unique species should be preferred.
3. Ecological significance. The following factors should be considered:
the importance of this water area for the maintenance of major ecological
processes (e.g., the area is the source of larvae that disperse broadly);
the area of the whole ecosystem (the water area by itself or together
with other reserves);
the quantity and diversity of biotopes;
the habitats of rare or endangered species;
the key biotopes for rare or industrially important species or key
biotopes for many species, including the water areas important for reproduction
or larval development and regions of fattening, reproduction and rest;
the water areas with a high biological diversity;
4. Economic significance. The current or potential importance
for the economy; the significance of the area for recreation; opportunities
for the development of tourism; the role of traditional exploitation,
preservation and maintenance of economically valuable species;
5. Social significance. The value of the selected area as a historic
and cultural site; the current or potential value for aesthetic education;
the recreational value;
6. Scientific significance. The water area’s value for purposes
of scientific research or monitoring; the availability of long-term data
series for all or part of the area;
7. “Reality” and practicability. The possibility of establishing
a reserve and its necessity:
degree of isolation from outer disturbance;
social and political acceptability, degree of support from the local
population;
applicability for educational, touristic, and recreational purposes;
compatibility with current exploitation; the acceptability of the
protection status to the local population, compatibility with the existing
mode of management;
estimated economic effect.
These criteria can help to determine the significance of a particular
area in the common system (local, national, international). For each proposed
area, one must determine whether it can be included in the World Heritage
list, become a Biosphere Reserve, or the focus of existing international
conservation agreements and conventions.
In Russia, the creation of marine reserves has yet to begin in earnest.
The only marine reserve in Russia today is the Dalnevostochny (Far Eastern)
Marine Reserve in the Peter the Great Bay of the Sea of Japan. Several
terrestrial reserves include marine areas along their borders. Several
highly interesting suggestions have been made concerning the proposed
establishment of a multifunctional system of marine reserves along Russia’s
in-shore zone. A review of these suggestions and an analysis of the opportunities
for establishing marine protected areas in Russia will be presented in
a subsequent article.
Reference List
Bryant D., Burke L., McManus J., Spalding M. Reefs at risk. A
map-based indicator of threats to the world's coral reefs. — Washington:
World Resources Inst., 1998. — 56 p.
Enemark J., Wesemueller H., Gerdiken A. The Wadden Sea: an international
perspective on managing marine resources // Parks. — 1998. — Vol. 8, ¹
2. — P. 36—40.
Kelleher G., Bleakley C., Wells S. A global representative system
of marine protected areas. — In 4 Vol. — Gland (Switzerland): Great Barrier
Reef Marine Park Authority: The World Bank: IUCN, 1995.
Kelleher G., Kenchington R. Guidelines for Establishing Marine
Protected Areas. — Gland (Switzerland): IUCN, 1991. — 79 p.
King M., Faasil U. A network of small, community-owned village
fish reserves in Samoa // Parks. — 1998. — Vol. 8, ¹ 2. — P. 11—16.
Marine Parks. Papers presented at the Special Symp. on Marine Parks,
11th Pacific Sci. Congr., Japan, September 4—9, 1966. — Tokyo,
etc.: Com. on Marine Parks: Nature Conservation Soc. of Japan, 1966. —
57 p.
Okada Y. The marine fishes and the marine parks in Japan // Marine
Parks. Papers presented at the Special Symp. on Marine Parks, 11th
Pacific Sci. Congr., Japan, September 4—9, 1966. — Tokyo, etc., 1966.
— P. 30—33.
Marine National Parks Policy. — Ottawa (Canada): Parks Canada, 1986.
Pearson M. P., Shehata A. I. Protectorates management for conservation
and development in the Arab Republic of Egypt // Parks. — 1998. — Vol.
8, ¹ 2. — P. 29—35.
Tanzer J. Fisheries in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park — seeking
the balance // Ib. — P. 41—52.
V.O.Mokiyevsky,
PhD, senior researcher, P. P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian
Acad. Sci.,
Member of BCC Council.
E-mail: vadim@ecosys.sio.rssi.ru
