No-fishing reserves can restore marine ecosystems better than previously thought and can turn a heavily degraded site into an international model for
conservation, according to a decade-long study led by researchers at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla.
The report showed the amount of fish in an undersea wildlife park near the southern tip of Baja California soared 463 percent between 1999 and 2009.
That’s a world record, said authors of the peer-reviewed paper, which was published Friday in the journal Public Library of Science ONE.
The analysis comes less than two months before hotly contested, expanded marine reserves officially take effect Oct. 1 from Point Conception to the
U.S.-Mexico border. California regulators, scientists, environmentalists, the commercial fishing industry and others have spent years debating the
value of zones where seafood harvesting is prohibited or restricted for boosting marine diversity, enhancing recreational opportunties and possibly
rebuilding fisheries.
Results from the project off Mexico may not be directly transferable because the success seen at Cabo Pulmo National Marine Park was based on
remarkably widespread community backing, the relatively large size for the reserve and ecological factors that can’t be replicated precisely off San
Diego County’s coastline.
Still, they thrilled scientists at Scripps, which is part of the University of California San Diego, and their study partners from other institutions
in the United States, Mexico and Spain.
“The rate of change was so fast and it translated into big fish and predatory fish so that we consider it absolute recovery,” said Brad Erisman, a
fisheries ecologist at Scripps. “We never imagined it could happen so fast.”
He said similar turnarounds are possible in Southern California if coastal communities embrace the concepts and poachers are kept at bay. “Just
putting a marine protected area on paper doesn’t do anything and often it attracts fishermen,” Erisman said. “It will actually go in the wrong
direction if you don’t manage it. It’s like putting on the map, ‘Fish here.’”
California’s broadened network of reserves along the South Coast, developed under the Marine Life Protection Act of 1999, will cover roughly 350
square miles of state waters (15 percent of the total ocean area in that region) starting in October. They will have bans or limitations on taking
fish, crabs and other sea life.
Within a few years, more expanded reserves are expected to be created for all 1,100 miles of the state’s coastline.
Conservationists are planning “neighborhood watch” programs and aerial surveys to document how the areas are being used. In July, California’s Ocean
Protection Council pledged $4 million for monitoring to help determine how well the system works along the South Coast.
Fishermen generally criticize “no take” reserves as job killers and question whether the protections ever will produce a significant amount of sea
life that spills into waters where fishing is allowed. Two prominent fishing groups have sued the state Department of Fish and Game in hopes of
voiding the marine protected areas, saying the process for establishing them was illegal.
One recent analysis led by the University of Hawaii suggests skeptics are right about at least one thing: just setting up a reserve won’t reverse
declines in biodiversity.
That report, published last month, said the international network of protected areas suffers from several shortcomings including the lack of
connectivity between sites, funding shortfalls and pollution.
“Given the considerable effort and widespread support for the creation of protected areas over the past 30 years, we were surprised to find so much
evidence for their failure to effectively address the global problem of biodiversity loss,” lead author Camilo Mora of the University of Hawaii Manoa
said when the study was released. “Clearly, the biodiversity loss problem has been underestimated and the ability of protected areas to solve this
problem overestimated.”
While Scripps scientists documented an extraordinary example of how well a marine reserve can work, Friday’s study noted that the amount of fish
didn’t change significantly in other Gulf of California reserves that lacked strong enforcement or community support.
Between 1999 and 2009, the Scripps team examined more than 30 islands and peninsula locations along Baja California and found that Cabo Pulmo’s
richness of fish species blossomed into a biodiversity “hot spot.”
Co-author Exequiel Ezcurra, director of the University of California Institute for Mexico and the United States, had helped with studies in the 1990s
to prepare for a national park at Cabo Pulmo.
“The place at that time was not in good environmental health,” said Ezcurra, former director of the San Diego Natural History Museum’s research
division. “If you visit the place now, you cannot believe the change that has taken place.”
Animals such as tiger sharks, bull sharks and black tip reef sharks increased significantly — a good sign for the long-term health of the reserve.
Other large fish at Cabo Pulmo include gulf groupers, dog snappers and leopard groupers.
Friday’s paper said persistent efforts by local residents proved central to success. Boat captains, dive masters and other locals enforce the park’s
regulations and cleanup efforts.
Researchers also said Cabo Pulmo’s protected area has created economic benefits by spawning an eco-tourism businesses, including coral reef diving and
kayaking. They are trying to quantify how much marine life from the reserve is spilling over into harvest areas.
“It’s a valid question by fishermen,” Erisman said. “They need some numbers on that.”
They are trying to quantify how much marine life from the reserve is spilling over into harvest areas.
“It’s a valid question by fishermen,” Erisman said. “They need some numbers on that.”
Who are they trying to kid? These reserves have nothing to do with fishermen, either recreational or commercial.
They're a good idea for the pulmo reef but a bad idea for the California recreational fishermen. And since there are a handful of people 'underwater
tourists' in most of California these underwater parks will be pretty much unused. Thats very different than the wilderness areas in the sierras which
a great many people do use.cbuzzetti - 8-12-2011 at 08:26 PM
That is great news about the recovery of Cabo Pulmo.
But So-Cal is not going to see that kind of recovery due to the massive pollution of the area.
The water quality will not support a large volume of fish. The evidence is obvious when you move north or get to the outer islands. They are in clean
water but still have fishing pressure and support large quantities of fish.
The MLPA marine reserves is a sham based on the way it was railroaded down our throats.
We got screwed big time and they do not have the money to manage the reserves. This will most likely end poorly. Too bad because if it was done with
good science and responsibility it could have been a great thing. The science and monitoring does not include water quality as part of the program.
As a fisherman I am for conservation, it just needs to be done fairly and with good science.
There are reserves at Anacapa and Catalina that have been in place a long time. If you dive those areas you can see that reserves do work. As soon as
you cross out of that area it is obvoius. The reason for the dramatic change is the pressure that each of the ajoining areas recieve on a regular
basis.
Revolving closures would be the best choice IMO, instead of closing off an area forever.Pescador - 8-13-2011 at 08:22 AM
The MLPA idea was bad because it was based on "Politically Correct" thinking that had no basis in reality. They were closed off to any input and it
was railroaded into existence. If you start with false premises that pretty much taints the whole theory all the way through.
Cabo Pulmo worked in part because historically that was one of the most diverse areas in the whole Sea of Cortez that was ripe for regeneration and
was also in an area that was not very heavily populated.
To see the world's most thriving undersea wildlife park, head to the southern tip of Mexico's Baja peninsula.
Cabo Pulmo National Park (CPNP) is the world's most robust marine reserve in the world, according to a new study led by researchers at Scripps
Institution of Oceanography at University of California, San Diego.
Results of their 10-year analysis of Cabo Pulmo revealed that the total amount of fish in the reserve ecosystem — the biomass — boomed by more than
460 percent from 1999 to 2009. Citizens living around Cabo Pulmo, which was previously depleted by fishing, established the park in 1995 and have
strictly enforced its "no take" restrictions.
"We could have never dreamt of such an extraordinary recovery of marine life at Cabo Pulmo," said Enric Sala, the National Geographic
explorer-in-residence who started the study in 1999. "In 1999, there were only medium-sized fishes, but 10 years later it's full of large parrotfish,
groupers, snappers and even sharks."
Striking results
The most striking result of the study, the authors say, is that sea creatures at a depleted site can recover up to a level comparable to remote,
pristine sites that have never been fished by humans.
"The study's results are surprising in several ways," said Octavio Aburto-Oropeza, a Scripps postdoctoral researcher and lead author of the study. "A
biomass increase of 463 percent in a reserve as large as Cabo Pulmo (71 square kilometers) represents tons of new fish produced every year. No other
marine reserve in the world has shown such a fish recovery."
The paper notes that factors such as the protection of spawning areas for large predators have been key to the reserve's robustness. Most importantly,
local enforcement, led by the determined action of a few families, has been a major factor in the park's success. Boat captains, dive masters and
other locals work to enforce the park's regulations and share surveillance, fauna protection and ocean cleanliness efforts.
"We believe that the success of CPNP is greatly due to local leadership, effective self-enforcement by local stakeholders, and the general support of
the broader community," the authors wrote in their report.
Local impacts
Strictly enforced marine reserves have been proven to help reduce local poverty and increase economic benefits, the researchers say. The national
park's marine life recovery has spawned eco-tourism businesses, including coral reef diving and kayaking, making it a model for areas depleted by
fishing in the Gulf of California and elsewhere.
"The reefs are full of hard corals and sea fans, creating an amazing habitat for lobsters, octopuses, rays and small fish," said Brad Erisman, a
Scripps postdoctoral researcher and co-author of the article. "During some seasons, thousands of mobula rays congregate inside the park and swim above
the reef in a magnificent way."
The scientists have been combining efforts to monitor the Gulf of California's rocky reefs every year for more than a decade, sampling more than 30
islands and peninsula locations along Baja California, stretching from Puerto Refugio on the northern tip of Angel de la Guarda to Cabo San Lucas and
Cabo Pulmo south of the Bahia de La Paz.
During the 10 years of study, the researchers found that Cabo Pulmo's fish species richness blossomed into a biodiversity "hot spot." Animals such as
tiger sharks, bull sharks and black tip reef sharks increased significantly. Scientists continue to find evidence that such top predators keep coral
reefs healthy. Other large fish at Cabo Pulmo include gulf groupers, dog snappers and leopard groupers.
The study was published in the journal Public Library of Science (PLoS) ONE.MitchMan - 8-17-2011 at 06:30 AM
Very, very heartening to read the above. In my own, random and very unscientific observation, it seems to me that the sport fish stock in the Sea of
Cortez from Mulege to Cabo has severely diminished since the late 80s, maybe even more critically in the last 5 years. I keep hearing/reading of
illegal poaching going on by local commercial fishing, and even poaching by foreign countries like Japan coming into the Sea of Cortez and taking so
much fish that it has constituted depletion of fish. Also, I have also heard of the Mexican government's selective enforcement to non-enforcement of
existing protectionist/conservationist laws that has allowed the depletion to continue, unabated for the most part. I admit, I do not know the real
story or the real stats, so, I could be way off. I am not positing the above as actual fact or certain knowledge, just my own personal unscientific
observation as a part time resident of La Paz and sport fisherman there.
As a sport fisherman, I have noticed a distinct difference in the fishing out of La Paz; the preponderance of footbal sized tuna and small dorado...
when you can catch them.
Rebirth of a Mexican Marine Park, Big Fish Back Home
