Do marine reserves work?

Marine reserves or marine protected areas have become one of the major tools for the
management of coastal marine habits and exploited marine organisms. In the most recent review,
Wood et al, 2008 put the figure at 4,435 reserves. The total area has increased rapidly since the
early 1980s.
Australia has pioneered the establishment of marine protected areas and has close to one
quarter of the total number of MPAs in the world. Three of the 10 largest marine parks in the
world are in Australian waters including the GBR and the subantartic islands.
Marine reserves continue to be established for two main reason.
1) As a fishery management tool or harvest refugia, for exploited marine organisms.
- As a fishery management tool, they are claimed to increase fish stocks within boundaries,
to provide adult spill-over into fished areas and to provide a source of recruits to sustain
fisheries and to increase fish yields outside reserves.
2) For biodiversity conservation protecting marine species and ecosystems in no-take
conservation areas.
- As a conservation tool, they are claimed to maximise the protection of species, habitats
to provide resilience through connected network of protected populations and to protect
species by providing resilience to habitat degradation.
In the last few years, over 3,000 articles on MPAs have been published each year.
Benefits of MPAs within their boundaries
The most recent review of the biological effects of marine reserves has confirmed a range of
benefits within marine reserve boundaries. Lester et al 2009 reviewed the effects of 124 marine
reserves in 29 countries around the world. On average they found a
-

446% increase in biomass

166% increase in density
29% increase in average body size
21% increase in species richness in marine reserves compared to fished areas

Similarly benefits occurred in tropical to temperate waters and across a variety of taxa including
fish, invertebrates and algae.

A) Coral reefs:
There are over 1,500 coral reef protected areas in the world where there is coral reef
development, marine protected areas have been implemented. Coral reef marine reserves
usually have direct, positive effects on large exploited species.

E.g. in two marine reserves in the Philippines, there was a large increase in the density of large
predators inside marine reserves during years of protection. In the Sumilon reserve, which was
intermittently fished, numbers increased during years of protection and declined during period
when fishing occurred. Densities of large predators were extremely low in areas subject to fishing
over a long period. A more detailed analysis shows that you can predict the densities of large
predators on the basis of years of protection, which an essentially linear increase in number of
time.
In Australia, effects of reserve status on large predatory fishes such as coral trout have also been
established, despite the substantially lower fishing pressure. At houtman Abrolhos islands in subtropical Western Australia, there has been a 10 fold increase in coral trout numbers relative to
open areas subject to fishing.
Indirect effects can arise as a result of biological interactions between exploited and nonexploited species. Kenyan coral reefs, both direct and indirect effects on mollusc abundance and
community structure have been observed. The shallow lagoon mollusc communities differed
between open and closed areas as a result of collecting activities. At the reed edge there has
been an increase in the populations of triggerfish inside reserve areas. Triggerfish consume
invertebrate so there has been a decline in abundance of preferred prey inside reserve areas. On
the Great Barrier Reef, small planktivorous fishes (prey to the coral trout) have substantially
declined in protected areas. In the Caribbean, increases in the abundance of herbivorous fishes
in marine reserves have led to a reduction in algae cover and an increase in coral recruitment,
which in the long term promotes a healthy coral habitat.
Inside marine reserves you get an increase in large herbivorous fish, which indirectly leads to a
reduction in the cover of turf algae. Increases in large carnivorous fishes can lead to a decline in
certain invertebrates, which can promote coral abundance and diversity. the combination of
these effects promotes a coral-rich environment which is also promoted by the reduction in
mechanical damage due to fishing.
Overall, reserves may have either a lower or a higher diversity of species than non-reserve areas.
It just depends on the balance of increase and increases at different trophic level. This a return
to a more natural state inside reserves does not necessarily equate with a more diverse state.

B) Temperate intertidal
Heavily exploited intertidal, rocky reef areas, in South America and Africa, there is similar
evidence for both increases and decreases inside protected areas. Whole community studies
have documented almost equal numbers of species increasing and decreasing inside reserve
areas. As a direct effect, the mussel Perna perna, increases where collecting is banned and almost
disappears from open areas. Algae and barnacles increase in open areas as a result of the increase

in space left by removal of mussels. This study by Hockey and Bosman 1986 showed an interesting
pattern at the whole community level, where reserves at three locations were compared.
Reserves areas show a substantial increase in target organisms, including predatory molluscs and
grazers. Overall there can be a reduction in diversity of organisms inside particular reserve areas,
again suggesting that natural does not equate with diverse. However as different reserves can
promote different species, multiples reserve and non-reserve area clearly promotes biodiversity
on a larger scale.

C) Temperate rocky reefs

Temperate, subtidal reefs have been less intensively studied, but both increases and decreases
have been observed. The most extensive study involved the monitoring of 10 marine reserves
established at the Channel Islands California in 2003. The greatest positive effects were observed
for fishery targeted species, such as the ling cod and ocean whitefish. For non-targeted species,
both increases and decreases within boundaries were observed. The biomass of exploited species
almost doubled in reserves. The effects were greatest for piscivorous and carnivorous fishes. An
increase in large carnivores such as fish and lobsters results in a decline in sea urchins and other
associated invertebrate grazers. This can lead to the establishment of kelp forest habitats, which
promotes the abundance of kept associated fishes and invertebrates. Against the overall effect
on species richness may be unpredictable, but the combination of reserves and non-reserve areas
will promote biodiversity on a larger scale.

How good is the data?

The earlier studies on coral reef marine reserves were very poor. There is almost always no before
data, no long term monitoring. The only strength of these studies is that long term monitoring
has been recognised as very important.

Case study Kimbe Bay, Papua New Guinea

Results provide a cautionary note to the conclusion that marine reserves will always be effective.
Two exploited herbivorous fish species increased inside protected areas, relative to controls.
However, for the coral reef ecosystem and fish community as a whole, MPAs have not been
effective. Coral cover has generally declined in both reserve and fished areas, and algae cover
has generally increased. There is no evidence that reserves help restore the habitat to pristine
coral cover. The vast majority of small fishes have simply varied in repose to change in coral cover,
both inside and outside of reserves. Overall a few herbivores have increased, increased by more
in marine reserves but almost half of the fish species have declined by more than 50%. Hence I

does not appear that the reserves are protecting fish biodiversity as a whole, because these
reserves are being subject to extrinsic impacts other than exploitation.

Conclusions
MPAs are necessary, but not sufficient for biodiversity protection. Marine reserves do appear to
affect the diversity, abundance and structure of exploited populations. Despite the limitations in
the sampling designs of most of the studies, the evidence for positive effects on large, exploited
species is overwhelming. Both direct effects due to the protection from exploitation and indirect
effect due to food-chain reactions and habitat changes have been observed. The effects on local
diversity vary depending on the trophic level examined. The net effect on diversity within an area
may be decline and we should not consider the goal of reserves as being to maximise within-site
diversity. Biodiversity will be maximised by a matrix of protect and unprotected areas, regardless
of whether diversity declines within particular reserves.
That is reserve in which large fish can be exploited, but other organisms protected may also be
successfully employed to maintain high numbers of organisms at lower trophic levels.

Marine protected areas

Biodiversity conservation: protecting species an ecosystems.

-

To protect species and habitats within boundaries

To protect larger populations across networks of reserves
To provide resilience to other causes of habitat degradation

What are the biological effects of marine reserves?

-

How do they affect the abundance and structure of exploited populations?

How do they affect biodiversity and community structure, including non- exploited
species?

Reserves works for highly exploited species.

-

Marine reserves do affect the abundance, diversity and population-structure of

organisms with their boundariescommunities do return to a natural state although
many studies flawed
Direct positive effects due to protection from exploitation are very common
Tropic cascades reducing abundance of non-target species in reserves are also common

The overall effect on within reserve diversity is unpredictable. Biodiversity among areas
is maximised by a matrix of both protected and exploited areas.
MPAs necessary but not sufficient to protect marine biodiversity
A long way to go to reach target of 30% of worlds oceans in MPAs

Why implement no take marine reserves

1) Conservation (species, ecosystems, bio-regions)
Reserves generate alternative incomes, often from tourism, such benefits can be perceived by
stakeholders relatively quick
2) Fisheries management
Reserves can potentially provide fishery benefits. Reserves may eventually become net exporters
of fish biomass (adults, larvae) to fished areas. This helps to sustain fisheries in the long-term,