Transcript Dias nummer 1 - Havforskningsinstituttet

MPAs for fisheries management and nature
conservation in the Nordic region
Thomas Kirk Sørensen
[email protected]
MPA Workshop,
Bergen, March 2011
The Nordic Region
Greenland
Iceland
Faroe Islands
Finland
Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Nordic Forum on Marine Protected Areas &
Marine Spatial Planning
- Nordic approaches to integrated marine management
Blæsbjerg, M., Pawlak, J., Sørensen, T.K.
& Vestergaard, O. (2009)
Download: www.norden.org
Characteristics of the Nordic region
The Nordic region is a very diverse region but
shares many similarities:
•unique unity, with commonalities such as
languages, culture and a common history;
•fairly high level of fundamental environmental
awareness;
•highly developed regarding technology,
economy and education.
•history of relatively high level of regulation
and compliance
Blæsbjerg, M., Pawlak, J., Sørensen, T.K. & Vestergaard, O. (2009)
Let’s take a quick tour of the Nordic region…
…make a few stops to see if we can spot some examples of MPAs
that might reconcile fisheries management and nature
conservation objectives!
Denmark
• Natura 2000 (EU) sites designated. Potential set of MPAs
but management still not in place.
• Natura 2000 does not address commercial fish species or
their habitat requirements.
Closed since Jan ’09 to protect Kattegat cod
Closed0areas:
Area 1: closed during the 1st
-20 th
January-31
March (spawning
season), except for fishery with
selective gears; ”Kilen” (the
-40closed 1st February -31th
triangle)
March, except for fishery with
selective gears;
-60
56.75
Area 2. closed year round for all
fisheries except fisheries with
-80 gears.
selective
Area 3: closed year round for all
-100including recreational
fisheries,
fisheries;
10.50
11.00
11.50
12.00
12.50
Three year experiment
Finland
• MPAs are mainly focused around Natura 2000 EU
protected sites, which still lack management plans.
• very few examples of integrating commercial fisheries with
Natura 2000 management, as fisheries are small scale
with no real conflicts
• no true no-take zones
• Finland’s MPA strategy has mainly been focused on nature
conservation and recreation while MPAs for fisheries
management don’t really exist
Sweden
Koster-Väderö Fjord / Kosterhavet
National Park
Shrimp trawling and fishing for lobster
and Norwegian lobster are allowed.
Several sea-bed protection areas
where bottom trawling, anchoring, and
other activities are prohibited.
Goals include: a long-term sustainable
fishery in balance with the area’s
biological diversity, and the
improvement of fish and shellfish
stocks.
www.kosterhavet.se; Brochure screen dump
Gotska sandön: no-take area for
protection of turbot
No-take area
implemented in
2006 (360 km2)
Marine nature
reserve implemented
in 1987
Important
turbot
fishing area
Effects on turbot population
Turbot in no-take area compared to fished area (results
from monitoring in 2006-2009):
• lower mortality
• higher density of small and large turbot
• higher proportion of females (very few males grow to
size targeted in fishery)
• higher maximum size of females
Larval dispersal modelling:
• net dispersal from no-take
area towards fished area
Sweden
Natura 2000
Swedish colleagues have studied existing
nature conservation MPAs and modelled
how they function in protecting fish
(Sundblad et al. 2011).
Conclusion: in this case the most
important fish habitats are unprotected.
Norway
Area based management measures in Norwegian fisheries
management:
• competition between gears and fleets
• protection of spawning & nursery areas – permanent and
real time closures
• management of depleted stocks (i.e. coastal cod, redfish,
sandeel) & stationary stocks (i.e. lobster and seaweed)
• protection of vulnerable bottom habitats (i.e. coral reefs)
Norway
Norway is currently planning 36
candidate nature conservation
MPAs.
Strategy: cover a broad range of
habitats and thereby also a
broad range of species.
Some of these are cold water
Lophelia coral reef sites that
were “re-discovered” in the late
1990’s. By then they were
already heavily impacted.
Norway
Rapid establishment of protected coral sites, exclusion of bottom
contacting fisheries etc.
The text of the 1998 legislation (since amended):
The aim of this legislation is to protect coral reefs against
destruction resulting from fishing activity, and thereby to contribute
to a responsible resource management by amongst other things
securing reproduction and nursery areas of many fish
species. (Armstrong & van den Hove 2008)
©IMR
Barents Sea Plan
Ecosystem based,
Integrated management
plan for the Barents Sea–
Lofoten area
showing the main fishing
areas, shipping lanes,
and the area-based
framework for
hydrocarbon extraction
(2006–2010), together
with the particularly
valuable and vulnerable
areas.
Olsen E et al. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2007;64:599-602
Norway
European lobster (Homarus gammarus) in Norway is listed
in the national red list as near threatened.
In 2006 four lobster MPAs were implemented along the
Norwegian Skagerrak coast, where only hook and line is
permitted (Pettersen et al. 2009).
Iceland
Highly adaptive
system of temporal
and spatial closures
with much focus on
protection of
spawning and
juvenile fishes.
More recently MPAs
to protect coral
reefs.
Recent studies have shown that the fishery closures are important
to protect 3-dimensional habitat forming organisms (pers.comm.
S. Ragnarsson).
Faroe Islands
Dynamic system of
closures: year-round and
real time closures.
Separate conflicting
fisheries
Additional no take areas
for corals.
Figures from Cruz 2007
Greenland
• No examples of closing areas for fisheries
management purposes, mainly nature
conservation
• Ivittuut in southern Greenland protected
from trawl fishing in 2000 to protect birds
and highly unique Ikka columns.
• Parts of Melville Bay in NW Greenland
protected due to marine and terrestrial
mammals.
• Parts of the Illulisat ice fjord are off limits.
Greenland
Northeast Greenland National Park
Largest national park in the world
110,000 km2 sea area (3 nm from baseline),
mainly fjord landscape
Only traditional and line fishing permitted.
Has largely been protected by isolation,
but climate change may be changing
this…
Greenland
A survey among skippers in the shrimp fleet revealed the
presence of a coastal belt with corals in the coastal area
between Nuuk and Maniitsoq. Greenland has decided to protect
two sites in 2010.
Source: Management Plan for shrimp fishery in Western Greenland (2010)
Conclusions
All nations of the Nordic region use MPAs in fisheries
management and/or nature conservation.
Most MPAs are still based on traditional single sector
needs.
However, there are many lessons we can learn from
the MPAs that are planned to work towards
achievement of both objectives.
The current ”race for space” and the rush to develop
marine spatial planning leaves little space for a sector
by sector approach to MPAs.
Thanks to:
Ole Vestergaard, Ulf Bergström, Per Nilsson, Anita Tullrot,
Mattias Sköld, Claire Armstrong, Alf R. Kleiven, Erik Olsen,
Jón Solmundsson, Michael Haldin, Jan Ekebom, Naja Holm,
Stefan Ragnarsson
And thank you for your attention!
Danish Institute for Fisheries Research