Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:14:14.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role of science in MPA establishment in California: a personal perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2012

RAY HILBORN
RAY HILBORN*
Affiliation:
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, Box 355020, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-5020, USA e-mail: rayh@uw.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

California has now largely completed a process for establishing marine protected areas (MPAs) that may be considered a model for other jurisdictions seeking to meet obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity. In the Californian process, a team of scientists established guidelines on the size and spacing of MPAs, as well as requirements for habitat representation and replication. The final outcomes, in terms of proportion of the coast encompassed by MPAs and the distribution and sizes of MPAs, were largely a result of decisions taken by the advisory scientists, rather than by the designated decision makers. Future legislation must recognize the uncertainties associated with benefits of MPAs and specifically allow for adaptive management including explicit experimental tests of uncertainties. The science team should define at the outset the major uncertainties about impacts, and deliberate experimentation and adaptive management should be essential parts of each design. Future legislation should be much more specific about the objectives of the MPAs and specify the percentage of the area that should be set aside as MPAs. Finally, quantitative models rather than guidelines should be used to evaluate the consequences of alternative designs.

Type
THEMATIC SECTION: Temperate Marine Protected Areas
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 39 , Issue 3: Thematic section. Temperate Marine Protected Areas , September 2012 , pp. 195 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, L.G., Pondella II, D.J. & Horn, M.H., eds (2006). The Ecology of California Marine Fishes. Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Allison, G., Lubchenco, J. & Carr, M. (1998) Marine reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecological Applications 8 (1): S79–S92.Google Scholar
California Department of Fish and Game (2010) The Marine Life Protection Act Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas [www document]. URL http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/revisedmp0108.pdf Google Scholar
Gleason, M., McCreary, S., Miller-Henson, M., Ugoretz, J., Fox, E., Merrifield, M., McClintock, W., Serpa, P. & Hoffman, K. (2010) Science-based and stakeholder-driven marine protected area network planning: a successful case study from north central California. Ocean and Coastal Management 53 (2): 52–68.Google Scholar
Gruss, A., Kaplan, D. M., Guenette, S., Roberts, C. M. & Botsford, L. W. (2011) Consequences of adult and juvenile movement for marine protected areas. Biological Conservation 144 (2): 692–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubchenco, J., Gaines, S., Warner, R., Airame, S. & Simler, B. (2002) Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans. The science of marine reserves. PISCO [www document]. URL http://www.piscoweb.org/files/images/pdf/SMR_Intl_LowRes.pdf Google Scholar
Moffitt, E.A., White, J.W. & Botsford, L.W. (2011) MPA networks. Biological Conservation 144 (1): 306–318 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weible, C.M. (2007) An advocacy coalition framework approach to stakeholder analysis: understanding the political context of California marine protected area policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 17 (1): 95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weible, C.M. (2008) Caught in a maelstrom: implementing California marine protected areas. Coastal Management 36 (4): 350–373.Google Scholar
Weible, C., Sabatier, P.A. & Lubell, M. (2004) A comparison of a collaborative and top-down approach to the use of science in policy: Establishing marine protected areas in California. Policy Studies Journal 32 (2): 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, J.W., Botsford, L.W., Hastings, A. & Largier, J.L. (2010 a) Population persistence in marine reserve networks: incorporating spatial heterogeneities in larval dispersal. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 398: 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, J.W., Botsford, L.W., Moffitt, E.A. & Fischer, D.T. (2010 b) Decision analysis for designing marine protected areas for multiple species with uncertain fishery status. Ecological Applications 20 (6): 1523–1541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Hilborn Supplementary Material

Hilborn Supplementary Material

Download Hilborn Supplementary Material(File)
File 14 KB