Targeted education reduces marine protected area boundary encroachments: a case study from the Florida Keys

被引:4
作者
Renchen, Gabrielle F. [1 ]
Matthews, Thomas R. [1 ]
机构
[1] South Florida Reg Lab, Fish & Wildlife Res Inst, Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservat Commiss, 2796 Overseas Hwy, Marathon, FL 33050 USA
关键词
FISHERIES; NONCOMPLIANCE; CONSERVATION; RESERVES;
D O I
10.5343/bms.2017.1104
中图分类号
Q17 [水生生物学];
学科分类号
071004 ;
摘要
Compliance with marine protected area (MPA) regulations is considered a primary determinant of MPA success, though few studies have directly quantified this. The Florida Keys (USA) contain several types of MPAs that are managed by multiple state and federal agencies. The present study evaluated the use of lobster traps, relative to control areas, in two types of MPAs that protect coral reef habitat and prohibit lobster trap fishing: MPAs with marked boundaries vs MPAs with unmarked boundaries. The number of traps, trap owners, and trap location coordinates were recorded in replicate MPAs before and after an educational outreach effort to promote better recognition of trap fishing regulations in MPAs. The mean density of traps (number of traps km(-2)) was greatest in unmarked MPAs during both pre- [40.5 (SE 7.1) traps] and posteducation [23.9 (SE 4.5) traps] surveys; however, the reduction in trap density was not significant. Traps observed in unmarked MPAs were typically distributed throughout each area. In contrast, the density of traps in marked MPAs pre- [5.4 (SE 1.47) traps] and posteducation [1.3 (SE 0.6) traps] was significantly different, and traps were mostly concentrated near MPA boundaries. The density of trap owners posteducation was reduced in both marked and unmarked MPAs; however, the reduction was only significant in marked MPAs [2.1 (SE 0.5) to 0.6 (SE 0.3)]. The results of the this research highlight the critical roles of communication and fisher behavior in the management of MPA compliance and performance.
引用
收藏
页码:1201 / 1214
页数:14
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Dangerous targets? Unresolved issues and ideological clashes around marine protected areas [J].
Agardy, T ;
Bridgewater, P ;
Crosby, MP ;
Day, J ;
Dayton, PK ;
Kenchington, R ;
Laffoley, D ;
McConney, P ;
Murray, PA ;
Parks, JE ;
Peau, L .
AQUATIC CONSERVATION-MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS, 2003, 13 (04) :353-367
[2]   Mind the gap Addressing the shortcomings of marine protected areas through large scale marine spatial planning [J].
Agardy, Tundi ;
di Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo ;
Christie, Patrick .
MARINE POLICY, 2011, 35 (02) :226-232
[3]   Costs and effectiveness of education and enforcement, Cairns Section of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park [J].
Alder, J .
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 1996, 20 (04) :541-551
[4]  
Ault JS, 2005, B MAR SCI, V76, P595
[5]   Evaluation of average length as an estimator of exploitation status for the Florida coral-reef fish community [J].
Ault, JS ;
Smith, SG ;
Bohnsack, JA .
ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2005, 62 (03) :417-423
[6]   Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 [J].
Bates, Douglas ;
Maechler, Martin ;
Bolker, Benjamin M. ;
Walker, Steven C. .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL SOFTWARE, 2015, 67 (01) :1-48
[7]   Measuring and monitoring compliance in no-take marine reserves [J].
Bergseth, Brock J. ;
Russ, Garry R. ;
Cinner, Joshua E. .
FISH AND FISHERIES, 2015, 16 (02) :240-258
[8]   Limiting abuse: marine protected areas, a limited solution [J].
Boersma, PD ;
Parrish, JK .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1999, 31 (02) :287-304
[9]   Poaching, enforcement, and the efficacy of marine reserves [J].
Byers, James E. ;
Noonburg, Erik G. .
ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2007, 17 (07) :1851-1856
[10]   Weak Compliance Undermines the Success of No-Take Zones in a Large Government-Controlled Marine Protected Area [J].
Campbell, Stuart J. ;
Hoey, Andrew S. ;
Maynard, Jeffrey ;
Kartawijaya, Tasrif ;
Cinner, Joshua ;
Graham, Nicholas A. J. ;
Baird, Andrew H. .
PLOS ONE, 2012, 7 (11)