California Marine Life Protection Research Articles

It's a trust thing: Assessing fishermen's perceptions of the California North Coast marine protected area network

The California's Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) is a recent high-profile initiative that led to the implementation of a network of 124 marine protected areas (MPAs) encompassing 16% of state waters. The effort was conducted through six different regional processes that incorporated stakeholder and scientific involvement, ending with the North Coast region. While the initiative has been described as a success in terms of implementation, there has been relatively little empirical research about social perceptions of the MPA network in order to examine whether stakeholders view the effort as successful. Our research team conducted surveys with 178 commercial and charter fishermen and held five focus groups in each of the major ports of the region in order to assess fishermen's perceptions of the California North Coast MPA network – including perceptions of both the process of implementation and potential outcomes from the network. Among fishermen, satisfaction with the overall process was low; however, the level of satisfaction with the inclusion of local input and the final location of the MPAs was more evenly divided. Levels of trust in management entities, including those who implemented the MPA network, were low. Additionally, in focus group discussions, fishermen described several perceived shortcomings of the process, including an overall “top-down” approach, a failure to consider the local context, and the appearance of being dismissive of fishermen's perspectives. In terms of outcomes, fishermen overwhelmingly did not believe that the MPA network would improve ocean health or their income from fishing. Qualitatively, fishermen reported that while they were experiencing some minor adverse effects from the MPA network, overall they did not believe that socioeconomic impacts on the fishing industry from the MPA network would be substantial. Many expressed relief that the location of MPAs avoided many important fishing grounds. Trust emerged as an important variable. For example, the reported level of trust by fishermen in the entity that implemented the MPA network had a statistically significant correlation with their level of satisfaction with the overall process, including the final location of the MPA network. Findings complicate initial assessments of the MLPA implementation process as an overall success, and highlight the importance of trust to building successful and lasting marine conservation initiatives.

The California Seafloor and Coastal Mapping Program – Providing science and geospatial data for California's State Waters

The California Seafloor and Coastal Mapping Program (CSCMP) is a collaborative effort to develop comprehensive bathymetric, geologic, and habitat maps and data for California's State Waters. CSCMP began in 2007 when the California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) allocated funding for high-resolution bathymetric mapping, largely to support the California Marine Life Protection Act and to update nautical charts. Collaboration and support from the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners has led to development and dissemination of one of the world's largest seafloor-mapping datasets. CSCMP provides essential science and data for ocean and coastal management, stimulates and enables research, and raises public education and awareness of coastal and ocean issues. Specific applications include:•Delineation and designation of marine protected areas•Characterization and modeling of benthic habitats and ecosystems•Updating nautical charts•Earthquake hazard assessments•Tsunami hazard assessments•Planning offshore infrastructure•Providing baselines for monitoring change•Input to models of sediment transport, coastal erosion, and coastal flooding•Regional sediment management•Understanding coastal aquifers•Providing geospatial data for emergency response

Improving Ocean Management through the Use of Ecological Principles and Integrated Ecosystem Assessments

The US National Ocean Policy calls for ecosystem-based management (EBM) of the ocean to help realize the vision advanced in the 2010 Executive Order on the Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes. However, no specific approach for incorporating EBM into planning was provided. We explore how a set of ecological principles and ecosystem vulnerability concepts can be integrated into emerging comprehensive assessment frameworks, including Australia's National Marine Bioregional Assessments, California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative's regional profiles, Canada's Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management Initiative, and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA) program, to transition to ecosystem-based ocean planning. We examine NOAA's IEA framework to demonstrate how these concepts could be incorporated into existing frameworks. Although our discussion is focused on US ocean policy, comprehensive ecological assessments are applicable to a wide array of management strategies and planning processes.

Habitat‐specific larval dispersal and marine connectivity: implications for spatial conservation planning

Connectivity via larval dispersal is an important ingredient in setting effective marine reserve networks. Simple guidance for establishing spacing between individual protected sites can provide reliable rules of thumb to help ensure connectivity. Spacing rules for protected network design are relatively new to marine spatial planning, though so far they have been generically and indiscriminately applied to all types of habitats based on a single range of distance values. Here we address the extent to which such rules capture subtleties associated with dispersal distances varying among species in different regions and habitats. We applied a 50–100 km global spacing rule (SRglob), also recently applied in the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process and based on available global larval dispersal data, to a previously assessed network in the Gulf of California. Using larval dispersal data for species within this region (SRreg), we associated each species with eight unique habitats (SRhab*) and we evaluated connectivity by means of different spacing rules (SRglob, SRreg and SRhab*) using graph‐theory. The existing spacing rule employed by the MLPA process (SRglob) was found to be robust and conservative when applied to the Gulf of California or to its different habitats (i.e., the lower limit for dispersal distance includes the distance for all species in the Gulf). We found that species in different habitats exhibit statistically distinct dispersal profiles. Therefore, some habitats could be evaluated with more relaxed spacing rules (i.e., larger distances), than those proposed by the rules of thumb. Our work identifies a conservation planning trade‐off when implementing spacing rules: already proposed rules are robust but at the cost of efficiency. Habitat‐specific spacing rules should be considered for more efficient marine conservation planning solutions.

The California Marine Life Protection Act: A balance of top down and bottom up governance in MPA planning

California recently established a state-wide MPA network that extends over 1900km of coastline and includes 124MPAs totaling nearly 2200km². Designing and implementing such an MPA network in a populous democratic state with a large number of ocean users required a balance of top-down and bottom-up governance strategies. A legal mandate for MPAs identified the goals for the network and stipulated that scientific knowledge should form the basis of MPA design, while political necessity led to a participatory stakeholder-driven MPA design process. At the time of publication, the oldest region of the network was just five years old, so it remains to be seen how the governance strategies employed in MPA planning will evolve to meet the challenges of long-term MPA management.

California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative: Supporting implementation of legislation establishing a statewide network of marine protected areas

California enacted the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) in 1999 to redesign and improve the state's system of marine protected areas (MPAs), which the State Legislature found created the illusion of protection while falling far short of its potential to protect and conserve living marine life and habitat. In 2004, after two unsuccessful attempts to implement the MLPA, California created the MLPA Initiative through a memorandum of understanding among two state agencies and a privately-funded foundation that established objectives for a planning process, set out a timeline for deliverables, and established roles and responsibilities for key bodies.This paper analyzes how recommendations developed through the Initiative supported regulatory decisions by the California Fish and Game Commission to greatly expand the network of marine protected areas. That network includes 124 MPAs, covering 16.0% of state waters outside of San Francisco Bay, including 9.4% of state waters in "no-take" areas. Such an extensive network of MPAs that consciously incorporates science-based design guidelines is an important achievement worldwide and is a rare example of a sub-national government creating MPAs.Successful implementation of formally adopted public policies is well recognized as a complex process critical to achieving policy goals. The Initiative's Blue Ribbon Task Force played a significant role in guiding the planning process to its successful conclusion in providing the State the information it needed to redesign its system of MPAs. Additional elements of the Initiative's success included: effective statutes, adequate funding and professional capacity, robust stakeholder engagement, strong science guidance, effective decision support tools, transparent decision making, and sustained support from top state officials and private foundations.

Beyond traditional stakeholder engagement: Public participation roles in California's statewide marine protected area planning process

Public participation was one of the hallmarks of the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, a planning process to support the redesign of California's system of marine protected areas (MPAs). The MLPA Initiative implemented innovative and unconventional public outreach and engagement strategies to assist local communities share relevant knowledge and data, and provide timely and targeted contributions to MPA planning discussions. This collaborative model helped broaden traditional forms of participation to ensure public input received and integrated into MPA planning legitimately reflected the interests and priorities of California's coastal communities. A number of considerations were critical to the success of this collaborative approach, including: understanding the needs and limitations of public audiences; working directly with communities to identify appropriate outreach and engagement strategies; prioritizing strategies that supported a multi-directional exchange of information; adapting strategies based on public feedback and internal lessons learned; and hiring professional public engagement specialists. Strategies evolved over time and increased the level and quality of public participation over this multi-stage planning process. Experiences gained from the MLPA Initiative can be used to encourage consideration of collaborative participation in other environmental planning and decision-making processes.

MarineMap: A web-based platform for collaborative marine protected area planning

The creation of a spatial decision support system that enabled stakeholder participation in designing marine protected areas (MPAs) was a necessary component of the planning process for California's Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative. Implementation of the MLPA required stakeholders to understand and use a complicated set of spatial and scientific guidelines for MPA design that relied heavily on geographic information. Tools for the delivery and visualization of geographic information have changed radically in the seven years of planning during the MLPA Initiative. We collaborated to create a state-of-the-art spatial decision support system called MarineMap to facilitate the design and evaluation of MPA proposals. MarineMap provided an intuitive user experience that simplified complicated spatial concepts, delivered critical information immediately to allow users to iterate through scenarios rapidly. This tool provided transparency in the process, and moved spatial analysis away from the domain of GIS experts to a broader group of stakeholders. We think the lessons from this experience can contribute to the further development of tools and approaches for coastal and marine spatial planning more broadly.

Addressing policy issues in a stakeholder-based and science-driven marine protected area network planning process

The California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative (Initiative) was a public-private partnership focused on designing a statewide network of marine protected areas (MPAs) to increase coherence and effectiveness in protecting the state’s marine life, habitats, and ecosystems through a public planning process. In pursuing this core charge, the Initiative had to consider a range of other (non-MPA) policy issues and develop approaches to ensure that MPA network planning continued unimpeded, while also facilitating the consideration of issues deemed outside of California’s MPA planning process. This paper explores the strategies used to address policy issues that arose in MPA planning and provides examples from six specific topic areas: fisheries management, water quality, military use areas, marine bird and mammal protection, dredging and maintenance, and tribal gathering activities. Each of these topics helps illustrate a different strategy utilized, including engaging policy issues early, providing additional evaluations, engaging additional support, putting complimentary issues on a parallel track, utilizing flexibility in statutes, and ensuring frequent and direct stakeholder communication. Considering how multiple issues were addressed in a MPA planning process provides important insights for more integrated coastal and marine spatial planning.

Enabling conditions to support marine protected area network planning: California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative as a case study

Without the proper enabling conditions, MPA planning processes can be significantly hindered in their capacity to achieve stated goals. In California, after two unsuccessful attempts, statewide planning of a network of marine protected areas (MPA) was achieved through the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative. Six initial enabling conditions contributed to moving the MLPA Initiative forward, ultimately meeting the statutory objective of redesigning the statewide system of MPAs. Those conditions included: (1) a strong legal mandate which provided guidance and flexibility; (2) political support and leadership which enabled the process to overcome political challenges and opposition; (3) adequate funding which ensured sufficient staff support and facilitated innovative approaches to a public MPA network planning process; (4) an aggressive timeline with firm deadlines which propelled the process forward; (5) willingness of civil society to engage which provided for better informed and broadly supported outcomes; and (6) an effective and transparent process design which optimized contributions from stakeholders, scientists, and policy makers. These conditions enabled the MLPA Initiative to avoid shortcomings of similar planning processes, with implications for broader national policy on coastal and marine spatial planning in the United States.

A comparison of approaches used for economic analysis in marine protected area network planning in California

In addition to fostering biodiversity goals, marine protected area (MPA) implementation has economic consequences for both commercial and recreational fisheries. During the implementation of the State of California (USA) Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA), which mandates the creation of an MPA network in California's state waters, the stakeholders and policymakers utilized a pair of economic analyses that addressed these considerations. One was a comparative, static assessment of short-term, “worst case” potential socioeconomic impacts to important fisheries based on surveys of local fishermen. This analysis made no assumptions about fishery management outside of MPAs, assumed no spillover of fish from MPAs into fished areas or reallocation of fishing effort, and estimated the maximum potential dollar-value economic impacts over a short time scale. The other was a dynamic, bioeconomic assessment of the changes in spatial distribution of biomass and catch, based on published biological parameter values, oceanographic models of larval connectivity, and a range of possible levels of fishing. This analysis explicitly accounted for fish population dynamics, spillover, fisher movement, and fishery management outside of the MPAs, but was limited to long-term, equilibrium-based results because of a lack of baseline abundance data. Both evaluation methods were novel in their spatial resolution and their use directly in an MPA design process, rather than after implementation. The two methods produced broadly similar (at a regional spatial scale) evaluations of the likely effects of proposed MPAs on fisheries, at least when the bioeconomic model assumed fishery management was conservative. Our experience with these analyses in the MLPA Initiative process led to several suggestions for future MPA design efforts: (i) since the change in fish biomass inside MPAs partly depends on fisheries management outside of them, it is useful to integrate or coordinate conventional fishery management and MPA planning efforts; (ii) integrate modeling assessments early into MPA design, as part of a post-implementation adaptive management approach; and (iii) integrate empirical fishery data into bioeconomic models in order to improve representations of human behavior and short-term forecasts of changes in fished populations.

Engaging Los Angeles County subsistence anglers in the California marine protected area planning process

Abstract Ecosystem-based management is more successful when a great diversity of stakeholders is engaged early in a decision-making process. Implementation of the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) has been stakeholder-based, coordinating the participation of a wide range of people including divers, fishermen, conservationists, local officials, business owners and coastal residents. Although commercial and recreational fishermen have actively participated throughout the MLPA implementation process, and research related to California’s sport and commercial fisheries has been integrated into the process, pier and shore anglers have been relatively unengaged as stakeholders. This study was completed to generate information about pier angler understanding and sentiment towards marine protected areas (MPAs), as well as to educate anglers on the MLPA implementation process in southern California and inform them on involvement opportunities. Of the 3030 pier anglers surveyed over 12 months, 78% only fish for subsistence from piers and from shore (never from boats); 84.6% are of non-White/Euro-American ethnicity and speak English as a second language; and 82% indicated that they were supportive of establishing a strong network of MPAs in southern California, specifically fully-protective no-take marine reserves. This study is an example of an alternative and customized method of outreach designed to reach a unique and previously unengaged stakeholder group, which stands to be affected by the implementation of the MLPA in California. Engaging such non-traditional stakeholders in public policy may be critical for decision makers to gauge all views from those standing to be affected by a policy—not just the views of those that regularly attend policy meetings—and for the ultimate success of policy implementation and community support.

Bridging the marine–terrestrial disconnect to improve marine coastal zone science and management

MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 434:203-212 (2011) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09132 Bridging the marine–terrestrial disconnect to improve marine coastal zone science and management Benjamin I. Ruttenberg1,*,**, Elise F. Granek2,** 1National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 75 Virginia Beach Dr., Miami, Florida 33149, USA 2Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, PO Box 751, Portland, Oregon 97207 *Email: benjamin.ruttenberg@noaa.gov**Both authors contributed equally to this paper ABSTRACT: Coastal zone ecosystems sit between larger terrestrial and marine environments and, therefore, are strongly affected by processes occurring in both systems. Marine coastal zone systems provide a range of benefits to humans, and yet many have been significantly degraded as a result of direct and indirect human impacts. Management efforts have been hampered by disconnects both between management and scientific research and across linked marine–terrestrial systems. Management jurisdictions often start or end at the shoreline, and multiple agencies at different levels of government often have overlapping or conflicting management goals or priorities, or suffer from a lack of knowledge or interest. Scientists also often fail to consider connections among linked marine–terrestrial systems, and communication among agencies, among scientists in different disciplines, and between scientists and managers is often inadequate. However, despite the institutional and scientific challenges inherent in improving coastal zone management, there are examples of increased coordination and cooperation among different organizations. We discuss a number of examples—including where the marine–terrestrial and science–management disconnects persist and where better integration has led to successes in coastal zone management—and provide recommendations to scientists and managers on how to better link their efforts in science and management across marine and terrestrial systems. KEY WORDS: Nearshore ecosystem · Terrestrial runoff · Marine management · Interdisciplinary science · Florida Keys · California Marine Life Protection Act Full text in pdf format PreviousNextCite this article as: Ruttenberg BI, Granek EF (2011) Bridging the marine–terrestrial disconnect to improve marine coastal zone science and management. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 434:203-212. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09132 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 434. Online publication date: July 28, 2011 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2011 Inter-Research.

Incorporation of Spatial and Economic Analyses of Human-Use Data in the Design of Marine Protected Areas

Social, economic, and ecological criteria contribute to the successful design, implementation, and management of marine protected areas (MPAs). In the context of California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative, we developed a set of methods for collecting, compiling, and analyzing data about the spatial extent and relative economic importance of commercial and recreational fishing. We interviewed 174 commercial fishers who represented the major fisheries in the initiative's north-central coast region, which extends from Point Arena south to Pigeon Point. These fishers provided data that we used to map the extent of each of the fishing grounds, to weight the relative importance of areas within the grounds, to characterize the operating costs of each fishery, and to analyze the potential economic losses associated with proposed marine protected areas. A regional stakeholder group used the maps and impact analyses in conjunction with other data sets to iteratively identify economic and ecological trade-offs in designations of different areas as MPAs at regional, port, and fishery extents. Their final proposed MPA network designated 20% of state waters as MPAs. Potential net economic loss ranged from 1.7% to 14.2% in the first round of network design and totaled 6.3% in the final round of design. This process is a case study in the application of spatial analysis to validate and integrate local stakeholder knowledge in marine planning.

Science-based and stakeholder-driven marine protected area network planning: A successful case study from north central California

The planning process for California's Marine Life Protection Act in north central California represents a case study in the design of a regional component of a statewide network of marine protected areas (MPAs) for improved ecosystem protection. We describe enabling factors, such as a legislative mandate, political will, and adequate capacity and funding that fostered a successful planning process. We identify strategic principles that guided the design of a transparent public planning process that delivered regional MPA network proposals, which both met science guidelines and achieved a high level of support among stakeholders. We also describe key decision support elements (spatial data, planning tools, and scientific evaluation) that were essential for designing, evaluating, and refining alternative MPA network proposals and for informing decision-makers.

Spatial marine zoning for fisheries and conservation

Protected areas are an effective tool for reducing biodiversity loss. Current legislation distinguishes various types of marine protected areas, each allowing different levels of resource extraction. However, almost all of the theory for spatial conservation planning is focused on identifying no‐take reserves. The current approaches to zoning for multiple types of protected areas could result in suboptimal plans in terms of protecting biodiversity and minimizing negative socioeconomic impacts. We overcame these limitations in the first application of the multizone planning tool, Marxan with Zones, to design a network of four types of protected areas in the context of California's Marine Life Protection Act. We have produced a zoning configuration that entails mean value losses of less than 9% for every fishery, without compromising conservation goals. We also found that a spatial numerical optimization tool that allows for multiple zones outperforms a tool that can identify one zone (ie marine reserves) in two ways: first, the overall impact on the fishing industry is reduced, and second, a more equitable impact on different fishing sectors is achieved. Finally, we examined the tradeoffs between representing biodiversity features and impacting fisheries. Our approach is applicable to both marine and terrestrial conservation planning, and delivers an ecosystem‐based management outcome that balances conservation and industry objectives.

Collaborative Research: An Effective Way to Collect Data for Stock Assessments and Evaluate Marine Protected Areas in California

AbstractCollaborative fisheries research (in contrast to cooperative research) is based on the intellectual partnership between scientists and fishermen and is an effective way to collect data for stock assessments and to evaluate marine protected areas. Collaborative fisheries research is discussed in the context of co‐management of marine resources and how it contributes to a more democratic form of fisheries management. Many benefits result from working together, including (1) the incorporation of fishers' knowledge and expertise into the management process and (2) the development of shared perspectives derived through science‐based investigations on the status of marine resources. The California Collaborative Fisheries Research Program was formed in 2006 to participate in the monitoring of marine reserves established through California's Marine Life Protection Act. This program has shown that it can serve as a model for other areas that are trying to implement collaborative research and that collaborative research can greatly contribute to the realization of community‐based co‐management of marine resources.

Caught in a Maelstrom: Implementing California Marine Protected Areas

The first attempt to implement the 1999 California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) to establish marine protected areas (MPAs) ended contentiously in 2002. The initial MLPA process is examined by a statutory analysis and an analysis of stakeholder network relationships and beliefs. The failure of the initial MLPA process can be understood by a combination of factors: (i) Insufficient financial support from the California State government; (ii) Unclear, unranked and inconsistent statutory objectives; (iii) The application of a science-based process that excluded affected stakeholders; (iv) Implementing officials who lacked expertise in designing and managing political processes; and (v) A community of stakeholders who were polarized into coalitions of proponents and opponents of MPAs. The article concludes by discussing limitations of its methods and analysis and by offering strategies for learning from policy failures.

Effectiveness of marine reserve networks in representing biodiversity and minimizing impact to fishermen: a comparison of two approaches used in California

AbstractWe compared the effectiveness of marine reserve networks designed using a numerical optimization tool with networks designed by stakeholders during the course of California's Marine Life Protection Act Initiative at representing biodiversity and minimizing estimated negative impacts to fishermen. We used the same spatial data representing biodiversity and recreational fishing effort that were used by the stakeholders to design marine reserves. In addition, we used commercial fishing data not explicitly available to the stakeholders. Networks of marine reserves designed with numerical optimization tools represented the same amount of each habitat, or more, and had less of an estimated impact on commercial and recreational fisheries than networks designed by the stakeholders. The networks designed by the stakeholders could have represented 2.0–9.5% more of each habitat with no additional impact on the fisheries. Of four different marine reserve proposals considered in the initiative, the proposal designed by fishermen was more efficient than the proposals designed by other stakeholder groups at representing biodiversity and minimizing impact to the fishing industry. These results highlight the necessity of using comprehensive information on fishing effort to design a reserve network that efficiently minimizes negative socioeconomic impacts. We recommend that numerical optimization tools support, not replace, the stakeholder‐driven reserve design process along California's northern and southern coasts to help accomplish two of the initiative's core objectives: (1) Protect representative and unique marine habitats, and (2) Minimize negative socioeconomic impacts. The involvement of stakeholders is necessary as additional factors important to reserve design can not be considered using a numerical optimization tool.

Place-based ocean management: Emerging U.S. law and practice

Marine protected areas and marine reserves are being established in United States ocean waters under several federal and state laws. Relevant laws include the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, the Magnuson–Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management, the National Monument Act, the federal Submerged Lands Act, and the California Marine Life Protection Act. This article evaluates U.S. place-based ocean management from the perspectives of relevant international law principles and programs and foreign nation experiences relevant to the U.S. It then focuses on the challenges presented in managing multiple uses of U.S. ocean waters in the face of federal and state jurisdictional complexity. Integrating place-based management with fisheries management is given special attention.