FALL 2005

1
MARINE CONSERVATION

• FALL 2005
• EVPP 505-001
• BIO 508-002

2
Marine Conservation Issues

• Pollution
• Heavy metals TBT (lecture 2)
• Pesticides (lecture 3)
• Oil (lecture 4)
• Nutrients (lecture 5)
• Pathogens (lecture 5)
• Debris (lecture 6)
• Noise (lecture 7)

3
Marine Conservation Issues

• Poor fishery management (lectures 8 -9)
• Collapse of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua)
• Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus)
• 28 of global fish stocks are significantly
  depleted or overexploited
• Depleted fish stock show little sign of recovery
  even after decade of conservation measures

4
Marine Conservation Issues

• Destruction of keystone habitats (lecture 10)
• Nearly a quarter of all fish species associated
  with coral reefs
• Widespread coral reef damage
• Bleaching and disease events
• Siltation and smothering
• Possible impacts from global warming

5
Marine Conservation Issues

• Depletion of keystone species (lectures 11-14)
• Only 1 of original whitetip reef shark
  population in Gulf of Mexico
• North Atlantic right whale reduced to few 100
  animals
• Extinction of Stellar sea cow and Atlantic gray
  whale
• Destruction of turtle breeding beaches

6
Marine Conservation Issues

• Global warming (lectures 15-16)
• Melting of polar ice shelves
• Polar species habitat loss
• Increasing freshwater input
• Possible impact on thermohaline circulation
• Sea level rises
• Acidification of oceans
• Shifts of species distributions

7
Marine Conservation Issues

• Problems with marine conservation law and policy
  (lecture 17 Guest lectures)
• Imperfect laws
• Lack of enforcement
• Lack of integration
• Vested interests

8
Now in the age of marine deterioration?

• Reidl (1980) suggested there were 4 eras of
  marine research
• 1) Seafarers
• 2) Oceanographic Expeditions (e.g. Challenger
  expedition)
• 3) Marine Stations (e.g. Scripps Woods Hole)
• 4) Field Research
• Stachowitsch (2003) suggested a fifth era
• 5) Study of deteriorated marine ecosystems
• Because almost all marine ecosystems have
  been disturbed/damaged

9
OTHER PROBLEMS

• Although arguably a more urgent issue marine
  conservation is more difficult due to a number of
  issues
• e.g. getting information on species decline
• For 60 years no-one noticed extinction of limpet
  species Lottia alveus
• even though the area it inhabited was studded
  with marine laboratories (Carlton et al., 1991)
• WHY?
• Marine conservation research much harder than in
  a terrestrial environment

10
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Oceans are much bigger
• Area of Pacific Ocean could encompass all land
  continents alone
• Marine areas make up 99 of known biosphere
• BUT only a small area controlled by national laws
  
• (i.e. 200 nautical miles or
  less)

11
(No Transcript)
12
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Oceans less transparent than air
• Little light penetrates farther than 100m below
  surface
• In areas of high plankton/turbidity etc
  penetration even less
• Remote sensing from satellites/airplanes
  difficult
• Most marine areas/ecosystems not directly
  observable

13
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Oceans less transparent than air
• Also photosynthesis constrained to photic zone
  (sunlit waters)
• But nearshore and surface waters most effected by
  human activities
• Impacts on photosysnthesis and primary production
  effect whole marine ecosystem

14
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Oceans are 3 dimensional
• Water layers lots of stratification (result of
  salinity temperature differences)
• Much more complex environment than flat
  terrestrial environment
• LESS THAN 2 OF OCEAN ACCESSIBLE TO SCIENTISTS
  VIA SCUBA DIVING
• Submarines are few and expensive

15
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Dispersal stages smaller
• Many fish and invertebrate larvae lt1mm
• Terrestrial animals mostly disperse when
  juveniles
• i.e. much larger and easier to track
• Marine dispersal patterns difficult to predict
• Makes site-based conservation very difficult

16
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Longer dispersal distances
• Larval stages may drift for days or months
• Can disperse 1000s of km
• Recruitment of animals to specific site much more
  random
• Number of fish offspring ? recruitment rate
• Single small protected areas not enough to
  protect a species

17
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Pelagic environment fluid
• Although seabed (benthic) environment is very
  stable, pelagic environment is very changeable
• Movement of water bodies can shift habitat
  dramatically
• Fish stocks can shift location 10s of km in a
  single day
• Prediction of animal distribution difficult
• Small site protection not possible

18
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Primary production consumers are patchy
• Instead of sessile or long-lived (trees)
  producers mobile short-lived (phytoplankton)
• Growth or disappearance of producers can be very
  rapid
• Can rapidly exploit patchy nutrient resources or
  beneficial environmental changes
• Which means

19
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Consumers have to travel long distances
  productivity oases in oceanic desert
• Will encounter more human obstructions/activities
  in their travels (e.g. draft nets)
• Will travel through waters of many different
  countries and legal/exploitation regimes
• Patchy but high concentrations of associated
  species make patches profitable to fishing
  competition between marine species humans
• Less stable marine systems more susceptible to
  boom or bust than terrestrial environment

20
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Seabed structure components very small
• e.g. coral, worm tubes, seagrass, sponges provide
  important habitat structure
• as opposed to larger structures rainforest trees
  etc. in terrestrial environment
• Small size and lack of accessibility of these
  structures mean that managers overlook their
  importance
• e.g. seabed structure (e.g deep sea corals
  important for survival of young cod -provides
  hiding places from predators etc Lindholm et
  al., 1999)
• BUT seabed structures overlooked and destroyed

21
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Great increase in disturbance with decreasing
  distance from shore
• Near shore - more nutrients,
  temperature/salinity fluctuations, disturbance
  from waves and human activities
• But species further from the shore, and sea
  surface, less adapted to recover from
  disturbances
• If offshore/deep habitats or species damaged take
  longer to recover and impact great
• Especially a problem with deep water trawling and
  deep sea drilling etc.

22
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Oceans chemically downhill from land
• Chemicals, nutrients and waste flow from land
  to sea
• Very, very rare for contaminants to flow the
  other way, i.e. sea to land
• Activities on land can have major impacts on the
  oceans
• So conservation must take into account land based
  activities as well are marine activities

23
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Nutrients are not so quickly recycled
• On the land dead matter is decomposed and
  nutrients are returned to the ecosystem quickly
• In the oceans, dead and decaying organisms sink
• Once nutrients have sunk beneath the photic
  (sunlit) zone they are lost to producers
• until nutrients are re-circulated (e.g.
  upwhellings)
• These nutrients can be lost to producers for 100s
  of years
• Anthropogenic nutrients etc entering the marine
  system now -have impacts in 100s of years time

24
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Less opportunities for ex situ conservation
  (captive breeding etc)
• Larval stages of marine species very small,
  difficult to feed and maintain
• Seawater chemistry and physics difficult to
  maintain artificially
• Many species adapted/require wide-ranging, and
  mobile habitat (esp. pelagic species)
• Deep sea species are a particular problem (100sx
  atmospheric pressure)
• Mortality rates frequently high
• Appropriate ex situ habitat extremely costly

25
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Less opportunities for ex situ conservation
  (captive breeding etc)
• Larval stages of marine species very small,
  difficult to feed and maintain
• Seawater chemistry difficult to maintain
  artificially
• Many species adapted/require wide-ranging, and
  mobile habitat (esp. pelagic species)
• Deep sea species are a particular problem (100sx
  atmospheric pressure)
• Mortality rates frequently high
• Appropriate ex situ habitat extremely costly
• In situ required for conservation

26
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Marine species exploited are wild
• Terrestrial exploited species are primarily
  domestic/livestock
• Breeding controlled
• Predators controlled
• Feeding controlled
• Waste disposed of
• Medical treatment provided
• Climate/environment controlled
• Productivity of terrestrial stocks
  greater/controlled
• Meager human input to sustain marine stocks

27
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Technology for hunting/killing marine species
  less selective/evolving faster
• Wildlife removal on land very selective equipment
  and carefully controlled/regulated/monitored
• Fisheries now use satellite positioning,
  temperature sensors, 3D sonar
• Use large capacity fishing gear and vessels
  (e.g. 60 mile longlines, driftnets kms long)
• Laws and regulation have not kept pace with speed
  of technology development
• More efficient at catching more of fewer and
  fewer fish
• But non selective methods (e.g. mass of
  by-catch is several times shrimp catch)

28
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Lack of ownership/personal responsibility
• Land owners typically do not pollute and destroy
  land they own and farm
• 64 of ocean area outside of the control of any
  country (High Seas)
• Tragedy of the commons if you dont exploit it
  someone else will
• Countries with good land laws frequently turn a
  blind eye to/ignore sea laws
• Or easily persuaded to overlook over-exploitation
• E.g. North Sea scientists advise a zero cod
  quota politicians overruled this

29
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Marine species and ecosystems have less cultural
  and legal protection
• Large predators on land protected (e.g. bears,
  wolves) but not in oceans (sharks, marlin)
• Structure-providing organisms protected
  (trees/forests) but not sponges, kelp beds, deep
  water corals etc (coral reefs an exception in
  some areas)
• Coastal national parks may prohibit hunting land
  species, but promote hunting of marine species
• Extraction methods far more destructive than
  would be acceptable on land ( hunting deer
  with hand grenades)

30
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• less cultural and legal protection
• Protection of land wildlife often under
  conservation/environment departments but marine
  wildlife under fisheries departments
• Less legal protection
• An extraction/exploitation ethos rather than
  conservation
• Less experience/expertise in conservation biology
• Bodies dealing with marine conservation different
  from land conservation no control / input over
  land activities impacting the marine environment

31
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Much less spent on marine conservation!
• In 1999 US1,700 million spent on
  US National Park Service
• US 14.3 million spent on
  National Marine Sanctuaries
• x119 difference
• Disparity despite 71 of global being marine
• Despite 99 of the biosphere being marine

32
Published Research on Marine
Conservation vs Terrestrial

• Marine papers lt11 of leading conservation
  biology journal papers (n5974)
• 60.9 terrestrial
• 14.5 general
• 13.6 freshwater
• 10.1 marine
• 0.8 anadromous (e.g. estuarine etc)
• lt3 in Conservation Ecology to 40 in
  Aquatic Conservation
• Marine papers in Conservation Biology cited only
  7.1 x on average (vs. 18.2 x for terrestrial
  papers)
• so marine research has less impact

Kochin Levin. 2003, 2004
33
Pub. Res. on Marine Conservation

• Less than 5 of papers in marine ecology journals
  deal with conservation issues (n6618)
• 2.2 pollution
• 2.0 over-fishing
• 0.9 invasive species
• 0.4 marine protected areas
• In fisheries journals lt7 of papers dealt with
  conservation (n4700)
• 3.3 over-fishing
• 1.9 pollution
• 1.2 invasive species
• 0.2 marine protected areas
• National Science Foundation funding (Conservation
  Biology Restoration Ecology programs)
• gt80 terrestrial projects
• 9.7 marine projects

Kochin Levin. 2003, 2004
34
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Terrestrial and marine ecosystems threatened by
  similar problems
• Over-exploitation
• Physical deterioration of ecosystems/habitats
• Pollution
• Invasive species
• Climate change

35
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Driving forces behind problems the same
• Over-population
• Excessive consumption
• Insufficient understanding
• Undervaluing nature
• Inadequate institutions
• Also

36
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Maintaining the status quo insufficient (too
  much damage done already)
• Small populations at particular risk
• Top carnivores/keystone species especially
  important
• Even stable populations can be depleted by
  technological advances and inability to detect
  declines
• In situ ultimately better then ex situ

37
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Ecosystem conservation better than individual
  species conservation
• Emphasizing conservation of charismatic species
  can be an umbrella for other species
• Protected areas are good but not sufficient
  good management outside protected areas also
  required
• Countries with the fewest resources have the most
  biodiversity in need of conservation
• Strong special interests oppose conservation
• New technology can help as well as hinder

38
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN TERRESTRIAL MARINE
CONSERVATION

• Laws not enough for conservation
  - need public support too
• Vigilance is needed a brief lapse and species
  or habitats can disappear for ever
• Government environmental protection/ conservation
  departments always weaker than those
  exploiting/damaging
• Managing conservation managing humans
• Resources are scarce
• Time is short ?

39
REFERENCES
Norse, E. Crowder, L.B. 2005. Why marine
conservation biology? In Marine Conservation
Biology (Ed. E. Norse L.B. Crowder), pp. 1-18.
Island Press, Washington

• Carlton, J.T., Vermeij, G.J., Lindberg, D.R.,
  Carlton, D.A. and Dudley, E. 1991. The first
  historical extinction of a marine invertebrate in
  an ocean basin the demise of the eelgrass limpet
  Lottia alveus. Biological Bulletin 180(1) 72-80.
  
• Kochin, B.F. Levin, P.S. 2003. Lack of concern
  deepens the oceans problems. Nature 424 723.
• Kochin, B.F. Levin, P.S. 2004. Publication of
  marine conservation papers is conservation
  biology too dry? Conservation Biology 18
  1160-1162.
• Lindholm, J.B., Auster, P., Kaufman, L.S. 1999.
  Habitat-mediated survivorship of juvenile
  (0-year) Atlantic cod Gadus morhua. Marine
  Ecology Progress Series 180 247-255.
• Reidl, R. 1980. Marine ecology a century of
  changes. Marine Ecology 1 3-46.
• Stachowitsch, M. 2003. Research on intact marine
  ecosystems a lost era. Marine Pollution Bulletin
  46 801-805.