Management under uncertainty: guide-lines for incorporating connectivity into the protection of coral reefs |
| |
Authors: | L J McCook G R Almany M L Berumen J C Day A L Green G P Jones J M Leis S Planes G R Russ P F Sale S R Thorrold |
| |
Institution: | 1. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, PO Box 1379, Townsville, QLD, 4810, Australia 2. ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, 4811, Australia 3. Biology Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, 02540, USA 4. The Nature Conservancy, 57 Edmonstone St., South Brisbane, QLD, 4101, Australia 5. School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, 4811, Australia 6. Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, NSW, 2010, Australia 7. Centre de Biologie et d’Ecologie Tropicale et Méditerranéenne, Université de Perpignan, 52 Av. Paul Alduy, 66860, Perpignan CEDEX, France 8. International Network on Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University, 175 Longwood Road South, Hamilton, ON, L8P 0A1, Canada
|
| |
Abstract: | The global decline in coral reefs demands urgent management strategies to protect resilience. Protecting ecological connectivity,
within and among reefs, and between reefs and other ecosystems is critical to resilience. However, connectivity science is
not yet able to clearly identify the specific measures for effective protection of connectivity. This article aims to provide
a set of principles or practical guidelines that can be applied currently to protect connectivity. These ‘rules of thumb’
are based on current knowledge and expert opinion, and on the philosophy that, given the urgency, it is better to act with
incomplete knowledge than to wait for detailed understanding that may come too late. The principles, many of which are not
unique to connectivity, include: (1) allow margins of error in extent and nature of protection, as insurance against unforeseen
or incompletely understood threats or critical processes; (2) spread risks among areas; (3) aim for networks of protected
areas which are: (a) comprehensive and spread—protect all biotypes, habitats and processes, etc., to capture as many possible
connections, known and unknown; (b) adequate—maximise extent of protection for each habitat type, and for the entire region;
(c) representative—maximise likelihood of protecting the full range of processes and spatial requirements; (d) replicated—multiple
examples of biotypes or processes enhances risk spreading; (4) protect entire biological units where possible (e.g. whole
reefs), including buffers around core areas. Otherwise, choose bigger rather than smaller areas; (5) provide for connectivity
at a wide range of dispersal distances (within and between patches), emphasising distances <20–30 km; and (6) use a portfolio
of approaches, including but not limited to MPAs. Three case studies illustrating the application of these principles to coral
reef management in the Bohol Sea (Philippines), the Great Barrier Reef (Australia) and Kimbe Bay (Papua New Guinea) are described. |
| |
Keywords: | Ecological connectivity Reef management Margin of error Resilience Risk spreading Rules of thumb |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|