Closed areas for fisheries management—the case consolidates

Abstract

When, in 1995, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) reported that 69% of the world's marine fish stocks were in need of urgent action to conserve them, there could be no doubt that the management of marine fisheries was in a parlous state[ 1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (1995) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture, FAO Google Scholar ]. Even a cursory glance through weekend colour supplements or popular weekly science journals over the past year or so reveals that the situation is not improving. What can be done to remedy the palpable deficiencies in current management approaches? One measure that often meets great resistance from fishermen, but is beloved by conservationists, is the establishment of marine protected or `no take' areas (MPAs). However, although MPAs might serve a number of conservation functions[ 2 Allison G.W Lubchenco J Carr M.H Marine reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecol. Appl. 1998; 8: 79-92 Google Scholar ], until recently, advocates of the approach could point to few convincing data and little underlying theory that would support the case for establishing them to enhance fish stocks. Recent work by Lauck and co-workers, however, adds an important theoretical underpinning to the argument[ 3 Lauck T et al. Implementing the precautionary principle in fisheries management through marine reserves. Ecol. Appl. 1998; 8: 72-78 Google Scholar ], which incorporates the fact that both fisheries management actions and the data on which they rely are variable and uncertain.