Search Results

Marine conservation priorities have been established mostly on the basis of species and habitat diversity, but little attention has been paid to food web diversity. Ecologists are aware of the dynamic nature of marine food webs, and of the simplification of food web structure by anthropogenic activities, mainly fishing. Transient food web structures along gradients of fishing pressure are an analogue to stages along a successional gradient. This chapter describes regularities in food web structure along these gradients, and explores the global initial conditions (e.g., availability of species, sequence of species additions) needed to ensure that marine food webs will continue to function and adapt to environmental change in a world with increasing anthropogenic disturbance.

The Philippines depends on its coastal coral reef fisheries as a critical source of livelihood and seafood for both export and domestic consumption. By the mid-1990s, these fisheries had been over-exploited by both large-scale commercial and small-scale subsistence fishermen. Nearly all the coastal fisheries had been over-fished, and three-fourths of the coral reefs were being eroded. This chapter profiles Apo Island, one of the oldest marine protected areas in the country; the scientific research on marine conservation and coastal resource management that led to its creation; and the challenges that the community has faced in maintaining its no-take zone. The chapter also describes the USAID-funded Coastal Resource Management Project and its work building local government capacity to manage coastal resources at a larger scale, using Malalag Bay, Mindanao, as an example.

This chapter demonstrates that the current approach to international marine mammal conservation remains fragmented and ad hoc, and also that its rigidity renders it unable to respond to emerging threats or to adequately incorporate modern principles and norms of international governance. This chapter provides an essential overview of the current approach to marine mammal conservation, as it exists at the international and regional levels of governance. It provides an understanding of both the basis for the regulation of marine mammals and the current regulatory efforts, and indicates how to: identify gaps in coverage (in terms of both species and area), determine what has and has not worked well in the past, and justify the new international regime that forms this book’s central focus.

Large cetaceans have been regulated at the global level by the International Whaling Commission since the late 1940s. In the case of small cetaceans, however, it was not until the mid-1970s that concerns about their well-being began to be voiced by scientists and environmental organizations. This chapter focuses on European waters, where populations of cetaceans are believed to have declined significantly over the last two or three decades. Small cetaceans in these waters are the subject of two recent agreements: the Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas (the Ascobans Agreement), which was signed on 17 March 1992 and entered into force on 29 March 1994; and the Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, and Contiguous Atlantic Area (the Accobams Agreement), signed on 24 November 1996. This chapter analyzes these Agreements and evaluates their contribution to the conservation of cetaceans. It begins by examining the scientific background to the Agreements, in particular the population status of small cetaceans in the waters to which the Agreements apply and the threats to their well-being. It then briefly discusses the general international law background against which the Agreements are set before turning to the Agreements themselves.

Why do we need marine historical ecology and conservation? The fact is that since Darwin's On the Origin of Species, we have become quite good at inferring what existed—in terms of animals and plants—if only because we have (a) fossils and (b) a powerful theory which allows, nay demands, that we interpolate between the forms we know existed, because we have fossils, and the forms for which we have no direct evidence but which we can link to present forms, including us humans. The Earth's ecosystems have all been modified by human activities, and this applies also to essentially all marine ecosystems, which whaling and hunting of other marine mammals, and later fishing, have reduced to shadows of their former selves in terms of the larger organisms they now support and the benefits they can provide us. Some of these ecosystem modifications were unavoidable, but to a large extent, the depredations that we have imposed on the oceans have been entirely gratuitous. It is perfectly reasonable to ask ourselves how we could prevent such catastrophes in the future and whether we can rebuild now depleted populations of marine organisms so as to reduce the risk of this occurring again, and to have more to enjoy. This is what marine historical ecology in conservation is for: to inform us about what these populations have been in the past, and under which conditions these populations could flourish so that we can start helping them do so.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are increasingly used to manage targeted species. In order for protected areas to be effective conservation measures, strong public support is needed. Protected areas are dynamic spaces of human and interspecies interaction. Human engagement with MPAs as well as the species they are designed to protect is often fraught with deep-rooted social conflict. Conflicts often arise regarding rightful tenure, access to space, and use of resources; however, just as these interactions can provide opportunity for conflict, they also allow for the possibility of collaboration, resolution, and greater understanding. Protected areas are perceived very differently according to different ideas about the role and value of nature, historical experiences within a given environment, and cultural paradigms. Using the Westside National Park expansion project in Andros Island, Bahamas, in the Caribbean as a case study, this chapter explores the levels of conflict associated with disputes surrounding resource access and tenure systems in order to better understand the challenges of park implementation and marine conservation. Using the levels of conflict model to analyze the dispute over land tenure and access to marine resources, this chapter addresses the complexity and scope of the conflict surrounding protected areas conservation. Ignoring key issues underlying the conflict surrounding conservation projects will compromise policy goals as well as jeopardize the well-being of the people relying on the area for survival.

This chapter investigates how the marine ecosystem came to be the central object of conservation in the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources of 1980. This was a novel move in international law, because the protection of an entire ecosystem had never before been enshrined in a treaty. In the 1960s the Soviet Union began to investigate the potential of krill and other fisheries in the Antarctic. This worried other treaty parties and environmentalists because over-exploitation of krill would have flow-on effects on its predators. While the Soviet Union, joined by Japan and others, was resolutely pro-exploitation, other nations, led by the United States and Britain, were more pro-conservation, particularly focusing on protecting the ecosystem as a whole. The eventual codification of ecosystem protection demonstrated the power of the pro-conservation states at that time.

Social conflict and complexity in the marine environment present continual challenges to effective conservation. The physical, quantifiable, obvious expressions of human–wildlife and other conservation conflicts in marine ecosystems are often embedded in less obvious, more complex social conflicts between people and groups. Established efforts to understand these social complexities (and design appropriate decision-making processes) are advancing; but many prevalent stakeholder engagement processes fail to investigate and reconcile the deeper social conflicts that operate as wellsprings for protracted conflict in marine conservation. Conservation conflict transformation offers new tools for deeper analysis of the social drivers of conflict—a “do no harm” first step to help conservation efforts avoid escalating tensions, unintentionally reducing social receptivity to conservation, or deepening entrenched positions that polarize stakeholders—and principles, processes, skills, and strategies for preventing and reconciling conflict in conservation. The Human–Wildlife Conflict Collaboration (HWCC) has demonstrated the value of this approach across a diverse array of conservation contexts through conflict assessments and strategically designed and facilitated conflict interventions. HWCC’s capacity building is transforming how many practitioners in the conservation field address conflict. The chapter addresses current limitations in conservation capacity and practice, defines conservation conflict transformation, summarizes a model for analysis to orient the reader to the multiple levels of conflict, explores the sources of conflict commonly experienced in marine-based conservation, and offers clues to successful intervention.

This introductory chapter presents a description of the life history stages of fishes, from the egg/embryonic stage to the adult stage, focusing on the early parts of development and growth (early life history) which are the embryonic, larval and juvenile stages. It also presents the types of early life history studies conducted on fishes, including studies done on recruitment fluctuations, population assessment, aquaculture, and conservation studies. This chapter also discusses the integration of basic and applied science, in relation to studies on fish biology and ecology. The concluding discussion of this chapter presents the current literature in the study of early life history of fishes.

This chapter explores how the labels, names, and stories humans attach to wildlife can both influence the perception of human–wildlife conflict and guide efforts to reduce conflict and aid conservation efforts. How people talk about marine conservation, specific species, and human–wildlife conflict is not only a reflection of how they see the world but also influences attitudes toward conservation in others. This chapter will use a case study of the Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus schauinslandi) and the theory of social constructionism to explore these concepts and suggest ways that conservation professionals might use language and stories about animals to positively impact conservation efforts and reduce conflict. The Hawaiian monk seal is a highly endangered species endemic to the Hawaiian Islands and has been the object of intense conservation efforts. However, a recent increase in the seal’s population in the main Hawaiian Islands has resulted in increased conflict with and over the seals, especially between some native Hawaiians and local communities, the federal government, and other stakeholders. The narratives and stories about seals help to further drive conflict between those who want to protect the main Hawaiian Islands seal population and those who see it as a threat to their way of life.

This chapter analyzes the scientific and diplomatic debates on the question of sealing and seal conservation from 1964 to 1972, particularly the negotiation of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals. Because the Antarctic Treaty did not apply to the high seas, both scientists and diplomats noted that their 1964 conservation efforts did not cover animals, such as seals and penguins, when they were in the ocean. This gap seemed problematic when there was a push in the mid-1960s to renew commercial sealing in the Antarctic. The Antarctic Treaty parties thus committed to negotiating a treaty to cover seals in the high seas. They persisted in negotiating this agreement even when the prospect of renewed sealing lapsed, because seals and sealing became a useful subject by which the treaty parties, and scientists within SCAR, could continue to mark out their authority and positions for the Antarctic.

This chapter investigates how the foundational tension of Antarctic geopolitics over sovereignty and territory fared in the context of discussions on mineral and marine living resources in the 1970s. It investigates how the Antarctic Treaty parties fought off concerted interests from forums and states outside the treaty, including the Non-Aligned Movement within the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Food and Agriculture Organization, and growing international environmentalist organizations. It also investigates how the Antarctic Treaty parties tried to shift the balance of power among themselves, especially between the claimant and nonclaimant states. In the end, the Antarctic Treaty parties as a whole secured the treaty from outside forces, and the claimant states successfully perpetuated their ideas about sovereignty and territory in the changing context of the UN Law of the Sea against the acquiescent nonclaimants.