Biodiversity Management in a Mediterranean National Park: The Long, Winding Path from a Species-Centred to an Ecosystem-Centred Approach

Charles-François Boudouresque,Alain Barcelo,Thomas Changeux,Philippe Ponel,Thierry Thibaut,Isabelle Taupier-Letage,Michèle Perret-Boudouresque,Frédéric Médail,Aurélie Blanfuné,Gilles Martin,Sandrine Ruitton

doi:10.3390/d13110594

Abstract

The Port-Cros National Park (PCNP), established in 1963, was one of the earliest terrestrial and marine parks in the Mediterranean Sea. From 2012, it engaged in a major redefinition and extension of its territory (N-PCNP—New Port-Cros National Park). This case is particularly interesting insofar as the protected area has been competently and efficiently managed since its creation, and protection and management measures have been strictly implemented: in the Mediterranean, the PCNP has often been considered as a benchmark. Here, we critically analyse almost 60 years of the management of the biodiversity and the human uses, with their share of successes and failures, certain operations which are today regarded as errors, and a doctrine today of a priori non-interventionism, in contrast to the doctrine in vogue in the early years. Of particular interest is the change in outlook with regard to actions favouring flagship species, such as building a tower for bats, setting up artificial nests for seabirds, and constructing an artificial reef at sea. The question of the natural arrival of the wild boar, a native species, and the hostility of the public and some species-centred scientists, is particularly instructive. We analyse these changes in the light of the ongoing trends in concepts in ecology and nature conservation, and the shift from a species-centred to an ecosystem-centred approach. It is worth emphasizing that a critical review of almost 60 years of management is a very rare exercise in a national park anywhere in the world.

Highlights

We examined the minutes of the meetings of the Scientific Council (SC)—set up in 1964, and which has operated without interruption since (1–2 annual meetings)—and of its Bureau (4–6 annual meetings) [91,100]
For the general public and for many managers, species-by-species management based on emblematic species is much easier to understand and implement than the ecosystembased approach
It is clear that a national park should not deprive itself of emblematic species in its publicity material

Summary

Introduction

Staff and budget capacity are the strongest predictors of conservation efficiency: Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) with an adequate staff and budget capacity have a positive ecological impact three times greater than MPAs with inadequate capacity ([8], but see [9]). It is the protected surface area and the resources available that matter: especially in the marine realm, most MPAs are so-called ‘paper parks’ or ‘mist parks’. Mist parks are protected areas intended to fulfill the international commitments of countries; they often cover vast areas, have a real existence (director, premises, officials), but do not implement any real management measures involving, where necessary, constraints for some of the users [9,10,11,12,13,14]

Methods

Results

Conclusion