Modelling spatial and temporal scales for spill-over and biomass exportation from MPAs and their potential for fisheries enhancement

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are considered as a tool for marine conservation and sustainable fishery resource management. Improvements in fishery yields should take place via the spill-over of individuals from the reserve. In general, it has been demonstrated that MPAs affect the density and biomass of the organisms within them, however, little evidence has been found in order to assess the exportation of individuals across their boundaries. In this study, a simple model involving population growth, harvest, and the diffusion coefficient for individuals was used to explore the effects of protection on populations inside the reserve and the spill-over of individuals to the fished area. The model showed that biological responses inside marine reserves appear to develop quickly, reaching mean levels within a short (1–5 year) time period. Mean population abundance is always higher inside the reserve and highlights the effectiveness of protection, particularly when there is strong fishing pressure outside the reserve. However, reserves smaller than 2000 m radius show significantly lower levels of abundance inside than larger sites. Large MPAs (i.e. about 2000 m in radius) offer nearly the maximum capacity for recovery (close to 100% of the system carrying capacity) and nearly the maximum flux of individuals per unit boundary length. Very large MPAs (i.e. larger than 6000 m in radius) could be a guaranteed means of providing resilience in order to prevent population crises, with the added advantage that the flux of individuals is slightly higher at larger distances from the boundary. However, in practice they provide no further advantage towards increasing the density of individuals or the exportation of biomass, and a network of smaller MPAs could be more beneficial, both from the point of view of conservation and of benefits to fisheries.     

Structure of Caribbean coral reef communities across a large gradient of fish biomass

The collapse of Caribbean coral reefs has been attributed in part to historic overfishing, but whether fish assemblages can recover and how such recovery might affect the benthic reef community has not been tested across appropriate scales. We surveyed the biomass of reef communities across a range in fish abundance from 14 to 593 g m⁻², a gradient exceeding that of any previously reported for coral reefs. Increased fish biomass was correlated with an increased proportion of apex predators, which were abundant only inside large marine reserves. Increased herbivorous fish biomass was correlated with a decrease in fleshy algal biomass but corals have not yet recovered.     

Marine reserves: size and age do matter

Marine reserves are widely used throughout the world to prevent overfishing and conserve biodiversity, but uncertainties remain about their optimal design. The effects of marine reserves are heterogeneous. Despite theoretical findings, empirical studies have previously found no effect of size on the effectiveness of marine reserves in protecting commercial fish stocks. Using 58 datasets from 19 European marine reserves, we show that reserve size and age do matter: Increasing the size of the no-take zone increases the density of commercial fishes within the reserve compared with outside; whereas the size of the buffer zone has the opposite effect. Moreover, positive effects of marine reserve on commercial fish species and species richness are linked to the time elapsed since the establishment of the protection scheme. The reserve size-dependency of the response to protection has strong implications for the spatial management of coastal areas because marine reserves are used for spatial zoning.     

Larval dispersal and movement patterns of coral reef fishes,and implications for marine reserve network design

Well‐designed and effectively managed networks of marine reserves can be effective tools for both fisheries management and biodiversity conservation. Connectivity, the demographic linking of local populations through the dispersal of individuals as larvae, juveniles or adults, is a key ecological factor to consider in marine reserve design, since it has important implications for the persistence of metapopulations and their recovery from disturbance. For marine reserves to protect biodiversity and enhance populations of species in fished areas, they must be able to sustain focal species (particularly fishery species) within their boundaries, and be spaced such that they can function as mutually replenishing networks whilst providing recruitment subsidies to fished areas. Thus the configuration (size, spacing and location) of individual reserves within a network should be informed by larval dispersal and movement patterns of the species for which protection is required. In the past, empirical data regarding larval dispersal and movement patterns of adults and juveniles of many tropical marine species have been unavailable or inaccessible to practitioners responsible for marine reserve design. Recent empirical studies using new technologies have also provided fresh insights into movement patterns of many species and redefined our understanding of connectivity among populations through larval dispersal. Our review of movement patterns of 34 families (210 species) of coral reef fishes demonstrates that movement patterns (home ranges, ontogenetic shifts and spawning migrations) vary among and within species, and are influenced by a range of factors (e.g. size, sex, behaviour, density, habitat characteristics, season, tide and time of day). Some species move <0.1–0.5 km (e.g. damselfishes, butterflyfishes and angelfishes), <0.5–3 km (e.g. most parrotfishes, goatfishes and surgeonfishes) or 3–10 km (e.g. large parrotfishes and wrasses), while others move tens to hundreds (e.g. some groupers, emperors, snappers and jacks) or thousands of kilometres (e.g. some sharks and tuna). Larval dispersal distances tend to be <5–15 km, and self‐recruitment is common. Synthesising this information allows us, for the first time, to provide species, specific advice on the size, spacing and location of marine reserves in tropical marine ecosystems to maximise benefits for conservation and fisheries management for a range of taxa. We recommend that: (i) marine reserves should be more than twice the size of the home range of focal species (in all directions), thus marine reserves of various sizes will be required depending on which species require protection, how far they move, and if other effective protection is in place outside reserves; (ii) reserve spacing should be <15 km, with smaller reserves spaced more closely; and (iii) marine reserves should include habitats that are critical to the life history of focal species (e.g. home ranges, nursery grounds, migration corridors and spawning aggregations), and be located to accommodate movement patterns among these. We also provide practical advice for practitioners on how to use this information to design, evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of marine reserve networks within broader ecological, socioeconomic and management contexts.     

Exploitation and recovery of a sea urchin predator has implications for the resilience of southern California kelp forests

Size-structured predator–prey interactions can be altered by the history of exploitation, if that exploitation is itself size-selective. For example, selective harvesting of larger sized predators can release prey populations in cases where only large individuals are capable of consuming a particular prey species. In this study, we examined how the history of exploitation and recovery (inside marine reserves and due to fisheries management) of California sheephead (Semicossyphus pulcher) has affected size-structured interactions with sea urchin prey in southern California. We show that fishing changes size structure by reducing sizes and alters life histories of sheephead, while management measures that lessen or remove fishing impacts (e.g. marine reserves, effort restrictions) reverse these effects and result in increases in density, size and biomass. We show that predation on sea urchins is size-dependent, such that the diet of larger sheephead is composed of more and larger sized urchins than the diet of smaller fish. These results have implications for kelp forest resilience, because urchins can overgraze kelp in the absence of top-down control. From surveys in a network of marine reserves, we report negative relationships between the abundance of sheephead and urchins and the abundance of urchins and fleshy macroalgae (including giant kelp), indicating the potential for cascading indirect positive effects of top predators on the abundance of primary producers. Management measures such as increased minimum size limits and marine reserves may serve to restore historical trophic roles of key predators and thereby enhance the resilience of marine ecosystems.     

Marine reserves: long-term protection is required for full recovery of predatory fish populations

No-take marine reserves are advocated widely as a potential solution to the loss of marine biodiversity and ecosystem structure, and to over-fishing. We assess the duration of protection required for unfished populations of large predatory reef fish to attain natural states. We have monitored two marine reserves at Sumilon and Apo Islands, Philippines, regularly for 17 years (1983–2000). The biomass of large predatory fish was still increasing exponentially after 9 and 18 years of protection at Sumilon and Apo reserves, respectively. There was little evidence that the rate of accumulation of biomass inside the reserves was slowing down even after so many years of protection. This suggests that the length of time to full recovery will be considerable. We made two assumptions in order to estimate this period. Firstly, that biomass growth will follow the logistic model. Secondly, the conservative assumption that biomass had already attained 90% of the local carrying capacity of the environments in the reserves. We conclude that the time required for full recovery will be 15 and 40 years at Sumilon and Apo reserves, respectively. Such durations of recovery appear consistent with known life history characteristics of these fish, and with empirical data on recovery rates of heavily exploited fish stocks. By the time the full fisheries or ecosystem benefits from such reserves are apparent, human populations and impacts will have doubled in much of the developing world. Thus, networks of such reserves need to be implemented immediately. Furthermore, the management mechanisms for the reserves need to be successful over timescales of human generations.     

Spillover of fish naïveté from marine reserves

Spillover of adult fish biomass is an expected benefit from no‐take marine reserves to adjacent fisheries. Here, we show fisher‐naïve behaviour in reef fishes also spills over from marine reserves, potentially increasing access to fishery benefits by making fishes more susceptible to spearguns. The distance at which two targeted families of fishes began to flee a potential fisher [flight initiation distance (FID)] was lower inside reserves than in fished areas, and this reduction extended outside reserve boundaries. Reduced FID persisted further outside reserves than increases in fish biomass. This finding could help increase stakeholder support for marine reserves and improve current models of spillover by informing estimates for spatial changes in catchability. Behavioural changes of fish could help explain differences between underwater visual census and catch data in quantifying the spatial extent of spillover from marine reserves, and should be considered in the management of adjacent fisheries.     

Marine reserves and reproductive biomass: a case study of a heavily targeted reef fish

Recruitment overfishing (the reduction of a spawning stock past a point at which the stock can no longer replenish itself) is a common problem which can lead to a rapid and irreversible fishery collapse. Averting this disaster requires maintaining a sufficient spawning population to buffer stochastic fluctuations in recruitment of heavily harvested stocks. Optimal strategies for managing spawner biomass are well developed for temperate systems, yet remain uncertain for tropical fisheries, where the danger of collapse from recruitment overfishing looms largest. In this study, we explored empirically and through modeling, the role of marine reserves in maximizing spawner biomass of a heavily exploited reef fish, Lethrinus harak around Guam, Micronesia. On average, spawner biomass was 16 times higher inside the reserves compared with adjacent fished sites. Adult density and habitat-specific mean fish size were also significantly greater. We used these data in an age-structured population model to explore the effect of several management scenarios on L. harak demography. Under minimum-size limits, unlimited extraction and all rotational-closure scenarios, the model predicts that preferential mortality of larger and older fish prompt dramatic declines in spawner biomass and the proportion of male fish, as well as considerable declines in total abundance. For rotational closures this occurred because of the mismatch between the scales of recovery and extraction. Our results highlight how alternative management scenarios fall short in comparison to marine reserves in preserving reproductively viable fish populations on coral reefs.     

Marine Reserves: from Beverton and Holt to the Present

The idea of using marine reserves, where all fishing is banned is not new to fisheries management. It was first formally considered by Beverton and Holt but rejected in favour of approaches such as fleet and gear control. Since that analysis, many fisheries have collapsed worldwide, illustrating the vulnerability of fishery resources and the ineffectiveness of these approaches. Empirical data and modelling suggest that marine reserves would generally increase yields, especially at the high fishing mortality that occurs in most fisheries. However, the most interesting feature of reserves is their ability to provide resilience to overexploitation, thereby reducing the risk of stock collapse. Benefits from reserves come from the increase in biomass and individual size within them, resulting in adult migration and/or larval dispersal that would replenish fishing grounds. The use of marine reserves in managing fisheries necessitates a thorough understanding of critical habitat requirements, fish movement, fish behaviour, the relations between subpopulations and the critical density effect for larval dispersal. When properly designed, and coupled with other management practices, reserves may provide a better insurance against uncertainties in stock assessment, fishing control and management by protecting a part of the population from exploitation. This strategy can be used for both sedentary and migratory species.     

Reserves as tools for alleviating impacts of marine disease

Marine protected areas can prevent over-exploitation, but their effect on marine diseases is less clear. We examined how marine reserves can reduce diseases affecting reef-building corals following acute and chronic disturbances. One year after a severe tropical cyclone, corals inside reserves had sevenfold lower levels of disease than those in non-reserves. Similarly, disease prevalence was threefold lower on reserve reefs following chronic exposure to terrestrial run-off from a degraded river catchment, when exposure duration was below the long-term site average. Examination of 35 predictor variables indicated that lower levels of derelict fishing line and injured corals inside reserves were correlated with lower levels of coral disease in both case studies, signifying that successful disease mitigation occurs when activities that damage reefs are restricted. Conversely, reserves were ineffective in moderating disease when sites were exposed to higher than average levels of run-off, demonstrating that reductions in water quality undermine resilience afforded by reserve protection. In addition to implementing protected areas, we highlight that disease management efforts should also target improving water quality and limiting anthropogenic activities that cause injury.     

Large recovery of fish biomass in a no-take marine reserve

No-take marine reserves are effective management tools used to restore fish biomass and community structure in areas depleted by overfishing. Cabo Pulmo National Park (CPNP) was created in 1995 and is the only well enforced no-take area in the Gulf of California, Mexico, mostly because of widespread support from the local community. In 1999, four years after the establishment of the reserve, there were no significant differences in fish biomass between CPNP (0.75 t ha(-1) on average) and other marine protected areas or open access areas in the Gulf of California. By 2009, total fish biomass at CPNP had increased to 4.24 t ha(-1) (absolute biomass increase of 3.49 t ha(-1), or 463%), and the biomass of top predators and carnivores increased by 11 and 4 times, respectively. However, fish biomass did not change significantly in other marine protected areas or open access areas over the same time period. The absolute increase in fish biomass at CPNP within a decade is the largest measured in a marine reserve worldwide, and it is likely due to a combination of social (strong community leadership, social cohesion, effective enforcement) and ecological factors. The recovery of fish biomass inside CPNP has resulted in significant economic benefits, indicating that community-managed marine reserves are a viable solution to unsustainable coastal development and fisheries collapse in the Gulf of California and elsewhere.     

Effects of marine reserve characteristics on the protection of fish populations: a meta-analysis

Meta-analyses of published data for 19 marine reserves reveal that marine protected areas enhance species richness consistently, but their effect on fish abundance is more variable. Overall, there was a slight (11%) but significant increase in fish species number inside marine reserves, with all reserves sharing a common effect. There was a substantial but non-significant increase in overall fish abundance inside marine reserves compared to adjacent, non-reserve areas. When only species that are the target of fisheries were considered, fish abundance was significantly higher (by 28%) within reserve boundaries. Marine reserves vary significantly in the extent and direction of their response. This variability in relative abundance was not attributable to differences in survey methodology among studies, nor correlated with reserve characteristics such as reserve area, years since protection, latitude nor species diversity. The effectiveness of marine reserves in enhancing fish abundance may be largely related to the intensity of exploitation outside reserve boundaries and to the composition of the fish community within boundaries. It is recommended that studies of marine reserve effectiveness should routinely report fishing intensity, effectiveness of enforcement and habitat characteristics.     

Effects of Management Tactics on Meeting Conservation Objectives for Western North American Groundfish Fisheries

There is considerable variability in the status of fish populations around the world and a poor understanding of how specific management characteristics affect populations. Overfishing is a major problem in many fisheries, but in some regions the recent tendency has been to exploit stocks at levels below their maximum sustainable yield. In Western North American groundfish fisheries, the status of individual stocks and management systems among regions are highly variable. In this paper, we show the current status of groundfish stocks from Alaska, British Columbia, and the U.S. West Coast, and quantify the influence on stock status of six management tactics often hypothesized to affect groundfish. These tactics are: the use of harvest control rules with estimated biological reference points; seasonal closures; marine reserves; bycatch constraints; individual quotas (i.e., ‘catch shares’); and gear type. Despite the high commercial value of many groundfish and consequent incentives for maintaining stocks at their most productive levels, most stocks were managed extremely conservatively, with current exploitation rates at only 40% of management targets and biomass 33% above target biomass on average. Catches rarely exceeded TACs but on occasion were far below TACs (mean catch:TAC ratio of 57%); approximately $150 million of potential landed value was foregone annually by underutilizing TACs. The use of individual quotas, marine reserves, and harvest control rules with estimated limit reference points had little overall effect on stock status. More valuable fisheries were maintained closer to management targets and were less variable over time than stocks with lower catches or ex-vessel prices. Together these results suggest there is no single effective management measure for meeting conservation objectives; if scientifically established quotas are set and enforced, a variety of means can be used to ensure that exploitation rates and biomass levels are near to or more conservative than management targets.     

Potential of a no‐take marine reserve to protect home ranges of anadromous brown trout (Salmo trutta)

The extent to which no‐take marine reserves can benefit anadromous species requires examination. Here, we used acoustic telemetry to investigate the spatial behavior of anadromous brown trout (sea trout, Salmo trutta) in relation to a small marine reserve (~1.5 km²) located inside a fjord on the Norwegian Skagerrak coast. On average, sea trout spent 42.3 % (±5.0% SE) of their time in the fjord within the reserve, a proportion similar to the area of the reserve relative to that of the fjord. On average, sea trout tagged inside the reserve received the most protection, although the level of protection decreased marginally with increasing home range size. Furthermore, individuals tagged outside the reserve received more protection with increasing home range size, potentially opposing selection toward smaller home range sizes inflicted on fish residing within reserves, or through selective fishing methods like angling. Monthly sea trout home ranges in the marine environment were on average smaller than the reserve, with a mean of 0.430 (±0.0265 SE) km². Hence, the reserve is large enough to protect the full home range of some individuals residing in the reserve. Synthesis and applications: In general, the reserve protects sea trout to a varying degree depending on their individual behavior. These findings highlight evolutionary implications of spatial protection and can guide managers in the design of marine reserves and networks that preserve variation in target species' home range size and movement behavior.     

Using marine reserves to estimate fishing mortality

The proportion of a fish stock that is killed by fishing activity is often calculated as the catch divided by the estimated stock biomass. However, stock biomass is notoriously difficult to estimate reliably, and moreover, the catch may be uncertain or misreported and does not include losses due to discarding. In all too many fisheries, these difficulties have lead to underestimates of total fishing mortality and the commercial demise of the fishery. No‐take marine reserves eliminate fishing mortality from within their boundaries and, for species that exhibit seasonal migratory behaviour, comparison of reserves with fished areas can provide direct estimates of the proportion killed by fishing. For an important exploited species in New Zealand, seasonal changes in density of sub‐legal fish at three marine reserves were similar in both reserve and adjacent non‐reserve areas. However, this result did not hold for legal‐size fish, and the difference in seasonal change between reserved and non‐reserved areas was used to obtain direct estimates of the total localized fishing mortality in the non‐reserve area over 6‐month periods. Estimates of the percentage of legal‐size fish killed by fishing ranged from 70 to 96%. These results demonstrate an unanticipated practical benefit from marine reserves that goes beyond their ecological role.     

Marine reserves demonstrate trophic interactions across habitats

Several infaunal bivalve taxa show patterns of decreased biomass in areas with higher densities of adjacent reef-associated predators (the snapper, Pagrus auratus and rock lobster, Jasus edwardsii). A caging experiment was used to test the hypothesis that patterns observed were caused by predation, using plots seeded with a known initial density of the bivalve Dosinia subrosea to estimate survivorship. The caging experiment was replicated at several sites inside and outside two highly protected marine reserves: predators are significantly more abundant inside these reserves. Survivorship in fully caged, partially caged and open plots were then compared at sites having either low (non reserve) or high (reserve) predator density. The highest rates of survivorship of the bivalve were found in caged plots inside reserves and in all treatments outside reserves. However, inside reserves, open and partially caged treatments exhibited low survivorship. It was possible to specifically attribute much of this mortality to predation by large rock lobsters, due to distinctive marks on the valves of dead D. subrosea. This suggests that predation by large rock lobster could indeed account for the distributional patterns previously documented for certain bivalve populations. Our results illustrate that protection afforded by marine reserves is necessary to investigate how depletion through fishing pressure can change the role of upper-level predators and trophic processes between habitats. Electronic Supplementary Material Supplementary material is available for this article at An erratum to this article can be found at     

Performance of non-native species within marine reserves

Conservation of biodiversity is a major aim of marine reserves; however the effects of reserves on non-native species, a major threat to biodiversity globally, is not widely known. Marine reserves could resist non-native species due to enhanced native diversity and biomass that heightens biotic resistance. Or non-native species could be enhanced by reserves by at least three mechanisms, including protection from harvesting, increased fishing pressure outside reserves facilitating invasions at a regional scale and increasing the exposure of reserves to more potential invaders, and increased propagule pressure from human visitation. We exhaustively searched the literature and found 13 cases that contained quantitative data on non-native species inside and outside marine reserves. In no cases did reserves resist non-native species. Of the seven cases where reserves were established prior to the arrival of the non-native species, five had no effect on the non-native species and two enhanced non-native species. Of the six cases where reserves were established in areas that had pre-existing non-native species, two had no effect on the non-native species and four enhanced the non-native species. These results suggest that while non-native species do equally well or better within marine reserves, too few data are currently available to draw broad, general conclusions regarding the effects of marine reserves on non-native species. Management plans for marine reserves rarely include guidelines for preventing or managing non-native species. If the trends we have detected here are supported by future studies, non-native species should be a priority for management of marine reserves.     

Fiji’s largest marine reserve benefits reef sharks

To provide more information about whether sharks benefit from no-take marine reserves, we quantified the relative abundance and biomass of reef sharks inside and outside of Namena, Fiji’s largest reserve (60.6 km²). Using stereo baited remote underwater video systems (stereo-BRUVs), we found that the abundance and biomass of sharks was approximately two and four times greater in shallow and deep locations, respectively, within the Namena reserve compared to adjacent fished areas. The greater abundance and biomass of reef sharks inside Namena is likely a result of greater prey availability rather than protection from fishing. This study demonstrates that marine reserves can benefit sharks.     

A theory for optimal monitoring of marine reserves

Monitoring of marine reserves has traditionally focused on the task of rejecting the null hypothesis that marine reserves have no impact on the population and community structure of harvested populations. We consider the role of monitoring of marine reserves to gain information needed for management decisions. In particular we use a decision theoretic framework to answer the question: how long should we monitor the recovery of an over‐fished stock to determine the fraction of that stock to reserve? This exposes a natural tension between the cost (in terms of time and money) of additional monitoring, and the benefit of more accurately parameterizing a population model for the stock, that in turn leads to a better decision about the optimal size for the reserve with respect to harvesting. We found that the optimal monitoring time frame is rarely more than 5 years. A higher economic discount rate decreased the optimal monitoring time frame, making the expected benefit of more certainty about parameters in the system negligible compared with the expected gain from earlier exploitation.     

Rapid Effects of Marine Reserves via Larval Dispersal

Marine reserves have been advocated worldwide as conservation and fishery management tools. It is argued that they can protect ecosystems and also benefit fisheries via density-dependent spillover of adults and enhanced larval dispersal into fishing areas. However, while evidence has shown that marine reserves can meet conservation targets, their effects on fisheries are less understood. In particular, the basic question of if and over what temporal and spatial scales reserves can benefit fished populations via larval dispersal remains unanswered. We tested predictions of a larval transport model for a marine reserve network in the Gulf of California, Mexico, via field oceanography and repeated density counts of recently settled juvenile commercial mollusks before and after reserve establishment. We show that local retention of larvae within a reserve network can take place with enhanced, but spatially-explicit, recruitment to local fisheries. Enhancement occurred rapidly (2 yrs), with up to a three-fold increase in density of juveniles found in fished areas at the downstream edge of the reserve network, but other fishing areas within the network were unaffected. These findings were consistent with our model predictions. Our findings underscore the potential benefits of protecting larval sources and show that enhancement in recruitment can be manifested rapidly. However, benefits can be markedly variable within a local seascape. Hence, effects of marine reserve networks, positive or negative, may be overlooked when only focusing on overall responses and not considering finer spatially-explicit responses within a reserve network and its adjacent fishing grounds. Our results therefore call for future research on marine reserves that addresses this variability in order to help frame appropriate scenarios for the spatial management scales of interest.