Скачать презентацию COMPLEMENTING ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN MARINE PROTECTED AREAS LEGISLATION Скачать презентацию COMPLEMENTING ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN MARINE PROTECTED AREAS LEGISLATION

3e294c0cb521d0f001715901bc6d9f68.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 19

COMPLEMENTING ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN MARINE PROTECTED AREAS LEGISLATION Dr. Vernon G. Thomas, Professor Emeritus COMPLEMENTING ECOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN MARINE PROTECTED AREAS LEGISLATION Dr. Vernon G. Thomas, Professor Emeritus Department of Integrative Biology College of Biological Science University of Guelph, Ontario, N 1 G 2 W 1 Canada E-mail: [email protected] ca

RATIONALES FOR MARINE PROTECTION DEAD WATER ZONES CAUSED BY TERRESTRIAL POLLUTION COMMERCIAL OVER-FISHING OF RATIONALES FOR MARINE PROTECTION DEAD WATER ZONES CAUSED BY TERRESTRIAL POLLUTION COMMERCIAL OVER-FISHING OF STOCKS DISASTERS FROM MARINE OIL & GAS EXTRACTION

REPRESENTING NATURE IN LAW: BRIDGING THE TWO SOLITUDES ESSENCE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENT → RELEVANT REPRESENTING NATURE IN LAW: BRIDGING THE TWO SOLITUDES ESSENCE OF MARINE ENVIRONMENT → RELEVANT LAWS & REGULATIONS DESCRIPTION → PROSCRIPTION DESIRE → REALITY ROLE OF MARINE ECOLOGY: DEFINE THE ESSENCE OF THE MARINE BIOLOGICAL & PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT TRANSLATE CONCEPTS OF ECOLOGICAL IMORTANCE INTO PROVISIONS OF LAW TO: - ENABLE GOVERNMENTS TO PRIORIZE AREAS FOR PROTECTION - ESTABLISH MARINE PROTECTED AREAS (MPAs) - MANAGE AND PROTECT SUCH AREAS OCEANS ARE NOT UNIFORM ENVIRONMENTS. THEY VARY ENORMOUSLY IN BIODIVERSITY AND FEATURES: SO WHAT, WHERE, AND HOW?

WHAT DO YOU WANT TO ACHIEVE? SINGLE, ISOLATED MARINE PROTECTED AREA? SINGLE, ISOLATED, MARINE WHAT DO YOU WANT TO ACHIEVE? SINGLE, ISOLATED MARINE PROTECTED AREA? SINGLE, ISOLATED, MARINE CONSERVATION AREA? MARINE PROTECTED AREAS NETWORK ? WHAT FUNCTIONS WILL IT SERVE? BIOLOGICAL PRESERVE: NO HUMAN USE; CREATED TO PROTECT SPECIES FROM ALL HUMAN ACTIVITES (TOURISM, FISHING, EXTRACTION). USE IS RECOGNIZED, AS IN - MARINE PARK: HUMAN USES ARE IMPLICIT. OTHER CRITERIA MAY BE USED, REPRESENTATION, SCENIC VALUE, GEOLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ATTRACTIONS. THEN EXISTING PARK LAW IS BEST SUITED TO DEAL WITH SUCH AREAS. - FISH RECRUITMENT SANCTUARY: AREA IS IDENTIFIED TO PRODUCE SPECIES THAT DISPERSE INTO ADJACENT AREAS AND SUPPORT COMMERCIAL FISHERY. OR, A MPA NETWORK: PROVIDES CONNECTIVITY AMONG AREAS TO ENHANCE ROLES THEREFORE CREATE LEGAL PROVISIONS UP FRONT.

NEW THINKING IN MARINE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION & PROTECTION - BASED LARGELY ON TERRESTRIAL PARK NEW THINKING IN MARINE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION & PROTECTION - BASED LARGELY ON TERRESTRIAL PARK RESERVE THEORY - MANY AREAS ARE TOO SMALL TO GIVE FULL PROTECTION, WHEN HUMAN USES ENCROACH ON BOUNDARIES - ATTEMPT TO LINK AREAS TOGETHER BY FORMING PROTECTED AREA NETWORKS - INCREASES TOTAL FUNCTIONAL AREA FOR BIODIVERSITY - CORRIDORS PROMOTE MOVEMENT AND NATURAL DISPERSAL OF ORGANISMS - PREVENT LOCAL EXTINCTION OF SPECIES DUE TO INADEQUATE SIZE OF ORIGINAL AREA - SAME CONCEPT APPLIED TO MARINE AREAS

WHERE SCIENCE CAN BE MOST USEFUL - IN CREATING NEW AREAS FOR BIODIVERSITY VERSUS WHERE SCIENCE CAN BE MOST USEFUL - IN CREATING NEW AREAS FOR BIODIVERSITY VERSUS MANAGING EXISTING AREAS - IN PRIORIZING WHICH AREAS ARE TO BE ESTABLISHED AS MPAs FOR BIODIVERSITY - VERY IMPORTANT IN DEFINING COMPONENTS OF CONNECTED NETWORKS

VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER PRODUCTIVITY& VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER PRODUCTIVITY& RECRUITMENT: CAPACITY OF AREA TO SUPPORT FOOD WEBS & ADD NEW MEMBERS OF POPULATIONS. THIS APPLIES TO ALL SPECIES OF THE MARINE COMMUNITY. MIGRATION PATTERNS: PREDICTABLE MOVEMENT OF SPECIES WITHIN AND INTO MARINE AREAS. BIODIVERSITY: TOTAL OF SPECIES PRESENT AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE. PRESENCE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTED BY OTHER LAWS. CONNECTIVITY: PHYSICAL PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR REGIONS CRITICAL FEATURES: PRESENCE OF REEFS, LEDGES, CANYONS

Diverse habitats Number of species Less diverse habitats Size of area (log) IMPORTANCE OF Diverse habitats Number of species Less diverse habitats Size of area (log) IMPORTANCE OF SIZE IN BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION

VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER PRODUCTIVITY& VITAL CRITERIA FOR MPAs SIZE: THIS IS A CRITICAL CRITERION: LARGER IS BETTER PRODUCTIVITY& RECRUITMENT: CAPACITY OF AREA TO SUPPORT FOOD WEBS & ADD NEW MEMBERS OF POPULATIONS. THIS APPLIES TO ALL SPECIES OF THE MARINE COMMUNITY. MIGRATION PATTERNS: PREDICTABLE MOVEMENT OF SPECIES WITHIN AND INTO MARINE AREAS. BIODIVERSITY: TOTAL OF SPECIES PRESENT AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE. PRESENCE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTED BY OTHER LAWS. CONNECTIVITY: PHYSICAL PROXIMITY TO SIMILAR REGIONS CRITICAL FEATURES: PRESENCE OF REEFS, LEDGES, CANYONS

IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY NUTRIENT DELIVERY HEAT TRANSPORT IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY NUTRIENT DELIVERY HEAT TRANSPORT

IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY B 2 B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY B 2 B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA NETWORK NUTRIENT DELIVERY HEAT TRANSPORT WHALES, MIGRATORY SEABIRDS, FISH, INVERTEBRATES VITAL PARTS OF MPA NETWORK SAME CAN BE DONE FOR OTHER REGIONS OF WORLD

IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY B 2 B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA IMPORTANCE OF OCEANIC CONNECTIVITY TO BIODIVERSITY B 2 B: BAJA – BERING SEA MPA NETWORK NUTRIENT DELIVERY HEAT TRANSPORT WHALES, MIGRATORY SEABIRDS, FISH, INVERTEBRATES VITAL PARTS OF MPA NETWORK SAME CAN BE DONE FOR OTHER REGIONS OF WORLD

PROPOSED B 2 B EXAMPLE FOR NORTH AMERICA. DOES LEGISLATION REFLECT ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA? & PROPOSED B 2 B EXAMPLE FOR NORTH AMERICA. DOES LEGISLATION REFLECT ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA? & DOES LAW ALLOW CREATION OF NETWORKS? EXAMINE LEGISLATION AT THE INTERNATIONAL TREATY, NATIONAL, AND STATE – PROVINCIAL LEVELS.

REFLECTION OF CRITERIA IN LAW 1: INTERNATIONAL TREATIES CBD, 1992 VULNERABLE CRITICAL HABITATS BIODIVERSITY: REFLECTION OF CRITERIA IN LAW 1: INTERNATIONAL TREATIES CBD, 1992 VULNERABLE CRITICAL HABITATS BIODIVERSITY: CRITICAL SPECIES UNCLOS III, 1982 Art. 8 f, k Art. 194 Art 194 NO PROVISIONS FOR SIZE, MIGRATION PATTERNS, PRODUCTIVITYRECRUITMENT, AND CONNECTIVITY

2: NATIONAL LAW. US EXAMPLE National Marine Fishery Conserv. Marine Mammal Criteria Sanctuaries Act 2: NATIONAL LAW. US EXAMPLE National Marine Fishery Conserv. Marine Mammal Criteria Sanctuaries Act Mgmt. Act Protection Act _________________________________________________ Size S. 303. a(5) x x Recruitment S. 303. b 1(A) x Migration Inferred* Special Biodiversity S. 303. b 1(A) x S. 1361(2(2)) Connectivity Inferred** x x S. 1801(b(2)) x S. 1361(2(2)) Critical Habitat Features Inferred** x S. 1361(2(2)) _________________________________________________ • * Inferred as part of “an ecological process”. • ** Inferred as “managed as a coherent system”.

3: NATIONAL LAW. CANADIAN EXAMPLE National Marine National Parks Oceans Fisheries Conservation Areas Act 3: NATIONAL LAW. CANADIAN EXAMPLE National Marine National Parks Oceans Fisheries Conservation Areas Act Act Criterion Act __________________________________________________ Size s. 9(3) s. 8(2) x x Recruitment s. 9(3) s. 8(2) x x Migration s. 9(3) s. 8(2) x x Special Biodiversity s. 9(3) s. 8(2) Connectivity Implied Critical Habitat features s. 9(3) s. 8(2) s. 35(1 b) x x x s. 35(1) (1 a, b, c, d) ____________________________________________________ Oceans Act & Fisheries Act used to implement MPAs in Canada; Jurisdiction is Fisheries & Oceans Canada Environment Canada administers national parks and marine conservation areas in which human use is assumed

4: STATE LAW. CALIFORNIA EXAMPLE Criteria Ocean Resources Mgmt. Act Marine Life Protection Act 4: STATE LAW. CALIFORNIA EXAMPLE Criteria Ocean Resources Mgmt. Act Marine Life Protection Act Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act Size √ √ √ Recruitment √ √ √ Migration Patterns √ √ √ Special Biodiversity √ √ √ Connectivity √ √ √ Critical Habitat Features √ √ √ __________________________________________________ Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Mexican law is not as well provisioned. These jurisdictions must improve provisions in law.

CONCLUSIONS: 1: FOR BIODIVERSITY PRESERVATION MPA NETWORKS IS THE FUTURE; - CONNECTIVITY ACROSS CHANGING CONCLUSIONS: 1: FOR BIODIVERSITY PRESERVATION MPA NETWORKS IS THE FUTURE; - CONNECTIVITY ACROSS CHANGING SEASCAPES - NETWORKS EMBRACE ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND SCALE 2: IMPORTANT ECOLOGICAL CRITERIA MUST BE REFLECTED, EXPLICITLY, IN LAW TO FACILITATE CREATION OF MPAs 3: FOR NETWORKS CREATION; - MOST FEDERAL US AND CANADIAN JURISDICTIONS NEED TO IMPROVE LAW - A HARMONIZED APPROACH ACROSS JURISDICTIONS IS REQUIRED

CONTINUITY OF PROVISIONS ACROSS LEVELS CONCEPT OF “NESTING, SO THAT THERE IS RECIPROCITY OF CONTINUITY OF PROVISIONS ACROSS LEVELS CONCEPT OF “NESTING, SO THAT THERE IS RECIPROCITY OF LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS WITHIN AND ACROSS LEVELS, LOCAL TO INTERNATIONAL: TREATIES NATIONAL LAW STATE, PROVINCIAL, LAW LOCAL, MUNICIPAL, LAW