DOCSLIB.ORG

(1) Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(1) Introduction Guide to Marine Protected Areas Prepared in April 2000 by J. L. Baker B.Sc. M.Env.St. under contract to the Coast and Marine Section, Environment Protection Agency, Department for Environment and Heritage South Australia Government of South Australia Guide to Marine Protected Areas For further information please contact: Office for Coast and Marine Department for Environment and Heritage GPO Box 2607 Adelaide SA 5001 Telephone: (08) 8204 2139 Facsimile: (08) 8204 1806 DECEMBER 2000 ISBN 1 876562 24 2 © Department for Environment and Heritage This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to its not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Department for Environment and Heritage. Editor: John Bridgland Cover design: RTFX Photographs: Marine Life Society of South Australia ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Printed by: Colour Tech Printed on recycled paper GUIDE TO MARINE PROTECTED AREAS CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1 2 DEFINITION, CLASSIFICATION AND TYPES OF MPAS......................................................................... 5 2.1 DEFINITION OF MPAs.............................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 CLASSIFICATION OF MPAs..................................................................................................................... 5 3 MPAS IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT ..............................................................................................7 3.1 BACKGROUND......................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 MAJOR EXAMPLES OF MPA TYPES....................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1 Marine biosphere reserves and multiple-use marine parks: two names for the same? ................... 8 3.2.2 MPAs for fisheries management: a global success story .............................................................. 10 3.3 MPAs FOR BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION: A NEW PARADIGM, OR A REPACKAGING OF EXISTING MPAs?...................................................................................................16 3.4 INTERNATIONAL EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL MPA ESTABLISHMENT.......................................... 19 3.4.1 MPAs for fisheries management and enhancement ...................................................................... 19 3.4.2 MPAs for ecosystem/habitat protection ......................................................................................... 22 3.4.3 MPAs for biodiversity conservation................................................................................................ 22 3.4.4 MPAs for rare/vulnerable/endangered species conservation ........................................................ 23 3.4.5 MPAs for tourism/recreation, education and/or research............................................................... 24 4 MPAS IN AUSTRALIA............................................................................................................................. 25 4.1 BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................... 25 4.2 MPA PLANNING AND CLASSIFICATION IN AUSTRALIA PRIOR TO THE NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM (NRSMPA).................................................................... 28 4.3 MPA PLANNING AND CLASSIFICATION UNDER OCEAN RESCUE 2000 AND THE NRSMPA.......... 29 4.3.1 National guidelines for MPA establishment in Australia................................................................. 30 4.3.2 IMCRA: mapping bioregions for the NRSMPA............................................................................... 33 4.3.3 Progress at State level in defining representative areas................................................................ 34 4.3.4 NRSMPA and ‘MOMPAs’: multiple objective or multiple abuse marine protected areas? ............. 35 4.3.5 Will the NRSMPA protect biodiversity?.......................................................................................... 36 4.3.6 How ‘representative’ will new MPAs be? ....................................................................................... 39 4.4 NATIONAL EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL MPA ESTABLISHMENT .................................................... 39 4.4.1 MPAs for fisheries management and enhancement ...................................................................... 39 4.4.2 MPAs for ecosystem/habitat protection........................................................................................... 41 4.4.3 MPAs for biodiversity conservation................................................................................................ 42 4.4.4 MPAs for rare/vulnerable/endangered species conservation ........................................................ 42 4.4.5 MPAs for tourism/recreation, education and/or research............................................................... 44 5 MPAS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA ............................................................................................................... 47 5.1 BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................... 47 5.2 EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL MPA ESTABLISHMENT ....................................................................... 48 5.2.1 MPAs for fisheries management and enhancement ...................................................................... 48 5.2.2 MPAs for ecosystem/habitat protection ......................................................................................... 49 5.2.3 MPAs for biodiversity conservation................................................................................................ 49 iii GUIDE TO MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 5.2.4 MPAs for rare/vulnerable/endangered species conservation ........................................................ 50 5.2.5 MPAs for tourism/recreation, education and/or research............................................................... 50 5.3 GAPS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA’S COASTAL-MARINE MPA NETWORK................................................. 51 5.3.1 Gaps in bioregional and ecosystems representation..................................................................... 51 5.3.2 Gaps in MPAs for fisheries management....................................................................................... 52 5.3.3 Gaps in MPAs for conserving vulnerable/rare/endangered species .............................................. 53 5.3.4 Gaps in MPAs for conserving biodiversity ..................................................................................... 54 5.3.5 Threats to South Australia’s near-shore marine ecosystems and biodiversity .............................. 54 5.3.6 A framework for establishing a representative system .................................................................. 56 6 MPA DESIGN AND SELECTION: NUMEROUS APPROACHES, NO CONSENSUS............................ 57 6.1 MPA DESIGNS FOR BIOGEOGRAPHIC AND ECOSYSTEM/HABITAT REPRESENTATION............... 58 6.1.1 International and national overview of mapping and classification ................................................ 58 6.1.2 Bioregionalisation as a basis for MPA design................................................................................ 60 6.1.3 State-level bioregionalisations....................................................................................................... 61 6.1.4 The role of the ‘delphic approach’ in bioregionalisation ................................................................. 62 6.1.5 Problems with bioregionalisation ................................................................................................... 63 6.1.6 Design criteria for representing biounits, ecosystems and communities ....................................... 63 6.1.7 The need for a network approach .................................................................................................. 64 6.1.8 Proportional representation of biounits/ecosystems/habitats: potential problems ......................... 66 6.2 MPA DESIGNS BASED UPON SINGLE-SPECIES POPULATION MODELS AND META-POPULATION THEORY ......................................................................................................68 6.2.1 Background.................................................................................................................................... 68 6.2.2 Data needs for designing fisheries MPAs ...................................................................................... 69 6.2.3 Design criteria for fisheries MPAs.................................................................................................. 78 6.2.4 Proportional representation for fisheries MPAs: potential problems .............................................. 87 6.3 SINGLE-SPECIES FISHERIES MPAs VERSUS MPAs FOR ECOSYSTEM REPRESENTATION.......... 87 6.4 MPA DESIGNS BASED UPON RESERVE SELECTION ALGORITHMS................................................ 88 6.5 MPA DESIGNS BASED UPON MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MODELLING.........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservation of Handfish and Their Habitats – Annual Report Tim Lynch, Tyson Bessell, Alexander Hormann, Carlie Devine and Neville Barrett
    Conservation of handfish and their habitats – annual report Tim Lynch, Tyson Bessell, Alexander Hormann, Carlie Devine and Neville Barrett Project A10 – Conservation of spotted handfish 28 February 2019 Milestone 4– Research Plan 4 (2018) www.nespmarine.edu.au Enquiries should be addressed to: Dr Tim P. Lynch Senior Research Scientist CSIRO Castray Esplanade [email protected] Project Leader’s Distribution List Derwent Estuary Program Ursula Taylor Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA) Craig Thorburn Natural Resource Management (NRM) Nepelle Crane South MAST Ian Ross Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania Nick Hutton Derwent Sailing Squadron Shaun Tiedemann The Handfish Recovery Team (HRT) See list below Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section Wildlife, Heritage and Marine Division Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) Threatened Species Policy and Andrew Crane Conservation Advice Branch Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE) Office of the Threatened Species Commissioner (DoEE) The project will also report its findings on a semi-annual basis to the National Handfish Recovery Team (NHRT) – see below. This is a governance body that is constituted between the Tasmanian State and the Commonwealth government with other interested parties: Department of the Environment and Energy (Commonwealth) Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Andrew Crane Environment (Tas) CSIRO scientist, running current surveys and substrate trials Tim Lynch (Chair) University of Tasmania, handfish research Neville
    [Show full text]
  • National Monitoring Program for Biodiversity and Non-Indigenous Species in Egypt
    UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM MEDITERRANEAN ACTION PLAN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTRE FOR SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS National monitoring program for biodiversity and non-indigenous species in Egypt PROF. MOUSTAFA M. FOUDA April 2017 1 Study required and financed by: Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat BP 337 1080 Tunis Cedex – Tunisie Responsible of the study: Mehdi Aissi, EcApMEDII Programme officer In charge of the study: Prof. Moustafa M. Fouda Mr. Mohamed Said Abdelwarith Mr. Mahmoud Fawzy Kamel Ministry of Environment, Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) With the participation of: Name, qualification and original institution of all the participants in the study (field mission or participation of national institutions) 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgements 4 Preamble 5 Chapter 1: Introduction 9 Chapter 2: Institutional and regulatory aspects 40 Chapter 3: Scientific Aspects 49 Chapter 4: Development of monitoring program 59 Chapter 5: Existing Monitoring Program in Egypt 91 1. Monitoring program for habitat mapping 103 2. Marine MAMMALS monitoring program 109 3. Marine Turtles Monitoring Program 115 4. Monitoring Program for Seabirds 118 5. Non-Indigenous Species Monitoring Program 123 Chapter 6: Implementation / Operational Plan 131 Selected References 133 Annexes 143 3 AKNOWLEGEMENTS We would like to thank RAC/ SPA and EU for providing financial and technical assistances to prepare this monitoring programme. The preparation of this programme was the result of several contacts and interviews with many stakeholders from Government, research institutions, NGOs and fishermen. The author would like to express thanks to all for their support. In addition; we would like to acknowledge all participants who attended the workshop and represented the following institutions: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Reef Fish Biodiversity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Megan E
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School November 2017 Reef Fish Biodiversity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Megan E. Hepner University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Biology Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Other Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Scholar Commons Citation Hepner, Megan E., "Reef Fish Biodiversity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary" (2017). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/7408 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Reef Fish Biodiversity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary by Megan E. Hepner A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Marine Science with a concentration in Marine Resource Assessment College of Marine Science University of South Florida Major Professor: Frank Muller-Karger, Ph.D. Christopher Stallings, Ph.D. Steve Gittings, Ph.D. Date of Approval: October 31st, 2017 Keywords: Species richness, biodiversity, functional diversity, species traits Copyright © 2017, Megan E. Hepner ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to my major advisor, Dr. Frank Muller-Karger, who provided opportunities for me to strengthen my skills as a researcher on research cruises, dive surveys, and in the laboratory, and as a communicator through oral and presentations at conferences, and for encouraging my participation as a full team member in various meetings of the Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON) and other science meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity
    Biodiversity KEY5 FACTS as hunting), as pasture grasses or as aquarium species Introduced (in the case of some marine species). They have also • Introduced species are been introduced accidentally, such as in shipments of recognised as a leading Species imported grain or in ballast water. cause of biodiversity loss Introduced plants, or weeds, can invade and world-wide. compete with native plant species for space, light, Trends water and nutrients and because of their rapid growth rates they can quickly smother native vegetation. • Rabbit numbers: a DECLINE since Similarly to weeds, many introduced animals compete introduction of Rabbit Haemorrhagic with and predate on native animals and impact on Disease (RHD, also known as calicivirus) native vegetation. They have high reproductive rates although the extent of the decline varies and can tolerate a wide range of habitats. As a result across the State. they often establish populations very quickly. •Fox numbers: DOWN in high priority Weeds can provide shelter for pest animals, conservation areas due to large-scale although they can provide food for or become habitat baiting programs; STILL A PROBLEM in for native animals. Blackberry, for example, is an ideal other parts of the State. habitat for the threatened Southern Brown Bandicoot. This illustrates the complexity of issues associated •Feral camel and deer numbers: UP. with pest control and highlights the need for control •Feral goat numbers: DECLINING across measures to have considered specific conservation Weed affected land – Mount Lofty Ranges the State. outcomes to be undertaken over time and to be Photo: Kym Nicolson •Feral pig numbers: UNKNOWN.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Species-Specific Edna-Based Test Systems For
    REPORT SNO 7544-2020 Development of species-specific eDNA-based test systems for monitoring of non-indigenous Decapoda in Danish marine waters © Henrik Carl, Natural History Museum, Denmark History © Henrik Carl, Natural NIVA Denmark Water Research REPORT Main Office NIVA Region South NIVA Region East NIVA Region West NIVA Denmark Gaustadalléen 21 Jon Lilletuns vei 3 Sandvikaveien 59 Thormøhlensgate 53 D Njalsgade 76, 4th floor NO-0349 Oslo, Norway NO-4879 Grimstad, Norway NO-2312 Ottestad, Norway NO-5006 Bergen Norway DK 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark Phone (47) 22 18 51 00 Phone (47) 22 18 51 00 Phone (47) 22 18 51 00 Phone (47) 22 18 51 00 Phone (45) 39 17 97 33 Internet: www.niva.no Title Serial number Date Development of species-specific eDNA-based test systems for monitoring 7544-2020 22 October 2020 of non-indigenous Decapoda in Danish marine waters Author(s) Topic group Distribution Steen W. Knudsen and Jesper H. Andersen – NIVA Denmark Environmental monitor- Public Peter Rask Møller – Natural History Museum, University of Copenhagen ing Geographical area Pages Denmark 54 Client(s) Client's reference Danish Environmental Protection Agency (Miljøstyrelsen) UCB and CEKAN Printed NIVA Project number 180280 Summary We report the development of seven eDNA-based species-specific test systems for monitoring of marine Decapoda in Danish marine waters. The seven species are 1) Callinectes sapidus (blå svømmekrabbe), 2) Eriocheir sinensis (kinesisk uldhånds- krabbe), 3) Hemigrapsus sanguineus (stribet klippekrabbe), 4) Hemigrapsus takanoi (pensel-klippekrabbe), 5) Homarus ameri- canus (amerikansk hummer), 6) Paralithodes camtschaticus (Kamchatka-krabbe) and 7) Rhithropanopeus harrisii (østameri- kansk brakvandskrabbe).
    [Show full text]
  • "Validity of Scorpaena Jacksoniensis and a Redescription of S. Cardinalis, a Senior Synonym of S
    "Validity of Scorpaena jacksoniensis and a redescription of S. cardinalis, a senior synonym of S. cookii (Scorpaeniformes: Scorpaenidae)" 著者 "MOTOMURA Hiroyuki, STRUTHERS Carl D., McGROUTHER Mark A., STEWART Andrew L." journal or Ichthyological Research publication title volume 58 page range 315-332 URL http://hdl.handle.net/10232/21762 doi: 10.1007/s10228-011-0234-2 Ichthyol Res (2011) 58:315–332 DOI 10.1007/s10228-011-0234-2 FULL PAPER Validity of Scorpaena jacksoniensis and a redescription of S. cardinalis, a senior synonym of S. cookii (Scorpaeniformes: Scorpaenidae) Hiroyuki Motomura • Carl D. Struthers • Mark A. McGrouther • Andrew L. Stewart Received: 29 April 2011 / Revised: 14 June 2011 / Accepted: 14 June 2011 Ó The Ichthyological Society of Japan 2011 Abstract The Scorpaena cardinalis complex, including Introduction S. cardinalis, S. jacksoniensis and S. orgila, is defined. The genus Ruboralga (type species: S. jacksoniensis) is regar- During revisionary studies of the genus Scorpaena (Scor- ded as a junior synonym of Scorpaena. Scorpaena jack- paeniformes: Scorpaenidae) by the first author, examina- soniensis Steindachner 1866, previously treated as a junior tion of the holotype of Scorpaena jacksoniensis synonym of Scorpaena cardinalis Solander and Richardson Steindachner 1866a found this nominal species to be a 1842, is regarded here as a valid species. Scorpaena cookii valid species, although it has been treated as a junior Gu¨nther 1874, previously treated as a valid species, is synonym of Scorpaena cardinalis Solander and Richardson regarded here as a junior synonym of S. cardinalis. Thus, in Richardson (1842) by numerous authors (e.g., Macleay recent recognition of the two Australasian scorpionfishes, 1881; Allen and Cross 1989; Allen et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Life-History Strategies of a Native Marine Invertebrate Increasingly Exposed to Urbanisation and Invasion
    Temporal Currency: Life-history strategies of a native marine invertebrate increasingly exposed to urbanisation and invasion A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Zoology University of Canterbury New Zealand Jason Suwandy 2012 Contents List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... vii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ viii CHAPTER ONE - General Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Marine urbanisation and invasion ................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Successful invasion and establishment of populations ................................................................ 4 1.3 Ascidians ....................................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Native ascidians as study organisms ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Checklist of Marine Fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the Proposed Extension of the Portuguese Continental Shelf
    European Journal of Taxonomy 73: 1-73 ISSN 2118-9773 http://dx.doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2014.73 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2014 · Carneiro M. et al. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9A5F217D-8E7B-448A-9CAB-2CCC9CC6F857 Updated checklist of marine fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf Miguel CARNEIRO1,5, Rogélia MARTINS2,6, Monica LANDI*,3,7 & Filipe O. COSTA4,8 1,2 DIV-RP (Modelling and Management Fishery Resources Division), Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera, Av. Brasilia 1449-006 Lisboa, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 3,4 CBMA (Centre of Molecular and Environmental Biology), Department of Biology, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] * corresponding author: [email protected] 5 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:90A98A50-327E-4648-9DCE-75709C7A2472 6 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:1EB6DE00-9E91-407C-B7C4-34F31F29FD88 7 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:6D3AC760-77F2-4CFA-B5C7-665CB07F4CEB 8 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:48E53CF3-71C8-403C-BECD-10B20B3C15B4 Abstract. The study of the Portuguese marine ichthyofauna has a long historical tradition, rooted back in the 18th Century. Here we present an annotated checklist of the marine fishes from Portuguese waters, including the area encompassed by the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf and the Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The list is based on historical literature records and taxon occurrence data obtained from natural history collections, together with new revisions and occurrences.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards the Resolution of the Microcotyle Erythrini Species Complex: Description of Microcotyle Isyebi N
    Towards the resolution of the Microcotyle erythrini species complex: description of Microcotyle isyebi n. sp. (Monogenea, Microcotylidae) from Boops boops (Teleostei, Sparidae) off the Algerian coast Chahinez Bouguerche, Delphine Gey, Jean-Lou Justine, Fadila Tazerouti To cite this version: Chahinez Bouguerche, Delphine Gey, Jean-Lou Justine, Fadila Tazerouti. Towards the resolution of the Microcotyle erythrini species complex: description of Microcotyle isyebi n. sp. (Monogenea, Microcotylidae) from Boops boops (Teleostei, Sparidae) off the Algerian coast. Parasitology Research, Springer Verlag (Germany), 2019, 118, pp.1417-1428. 10.1007/s00436-019-06293-y. hal-02080519 HAL Id: hal-02080519 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02080519 Submitted on 29 Apr 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Bouguerche et al. Microcotyle isyebi 1 DOI: 10.1007/s00436-019-06293-y ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:366371C5-3384-4CE5-A4C2-3AE839EA01DD Towards the resolution of the Microcotyle erythrini species complex: description of Microcotyle isyebi
    [Show full text]
  • Prospects of Red King Crab Hepatopancreas Processing: Fundamental and Applied Biochemistry
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 12 September 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202009.0263.v1 Article Prospects of Red King Crab Hepatopancreas Processing: Fundamental and Applied Biochemistry Tatyana Ponomareva 1, Maria Timchenko 1, Michael Filippov 1, Sergey Lapaev 1, and Evgeny Sogorin 1,* 1 Federal Research Center "Pushchino Scientific Center for Biological Research of the RAS", Pushchino, Russia * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-915-132-54-19 Abstract: Since the early 1980s, a large number of research works on enzymes from the red king crab hepatopancreas have been conducted. These studies have been relevant both from a fundamental point of view for studying the enzymes of marine organisms and in terms of the rational management of nature to obtain new and valuable products from the processing of crab fishing waste. Most of these works were performed by Russian scientists due to the area and amount of waste of red king crab processing in Russia (or the Soviet Union). However, the close phylogenetic kinship and the similar ecological niches of commercial crab species and the production scale of the catch provide the bases for the successful transfer of experience in the processing of red king crab hepatopancreas to other commercial crab species mined worldwide. This review describes the value of recycled commercial crab species, discusses processing problems, and suggests possible solutions to these problems. The main emphasis is placed on the enzymes of the hepatopancreas as the most highly salubrious product of waste processed from red king crab fishing. Keywords: marine fisheries; aquatic organisms; brachyura; anomura; commercial crab species; red king crab; Kamchatka crab; processing waste; hepatopancreas; waste recycling; enzymes; proteases; hyaluronidase 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices Appendices
    APPENDICES APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 – PUBLICATIONS SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Aidoo EN, Ute Mueller U, Hyndes GA, and Ryan Braccini M. 2015. Is a global quantitative KL. 2016. The effects of measurement uncertainty assessment of shark populations warranted? on spatial characterisation of recreational fishing Fisheries, 40: 492–501. catch rates. Fisheries Research 181: 1–13. Braccini M. 2016. Experts have different Andrews KR, Williams AJ, Fernandez-Silva I, perceptions of the management and conservation Newman SJ, Copus JM, Wakefield CB, Randall JE, status of sharks. Annals of Marine Biology and and Bowen BW. 2016. Phylogeny of deepwater Research 3: 1012. snappers (Genus Etelis) reveals a cryptic species pair in the Indo-Pacific and Pleistocene invasion of Braccini M, Aires-da-Silva A, and Taylor I. 2016. the Atlantic. Molecular Phylogenetics and Incorporating movement in the modelling of shark Evolution 100: 361-371. and ray population dynamics: approaches and management implications. Reviews in Fish Biology Bellchambers LM, Gaughan D, Wise B, Jackson G, and Fisheries 26: 13–24. and Fletcher WJ. 2016. Adopting Marine Stewardship Council certification of Western Caputi N, de Lestang S, Reid C, Hesp A, and How J. Australian fisheries at a jurisdictional level: the 2015. Maximum economic yield of the western benefits and challenges. Fisheries Research 183: rock lobster fishery of Western Australia after 609-616. moving from effort to quota control. Marine Policy, 51: 452-464. Bellchambers LM, Fisher EA, Harry AV, and Travaille KL. 2016. Identifying potential risks for Charles A, Westlund L, Bartley DM, Fletcher WJ, Marine Stewardship Council assessment and Garcia S, Govan H, and Sanders J.
    [Show full text]
  • OPEN SPACE and PLACES for PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils
    OPEN SPACE AND PLACES FOR PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils OPEN SPACE AND PLACES FOR PEOPLE GRANT PROGRAM 2019/20 - Metropolitan Councils PROJECT NAME Whitmore Square/ Iparrityi Master Plan - Stage 1 Upgrade (City of Adelaide) COST AND FUNDING CONTRIBUTION Council contribution $1,400,000 Planning and Development Fund contribution $900,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,300,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Council is seeking funding to deliver the first stage of the master plan to establish pleasant walking paths and extend the valued leafy character of the square from its centre to its edges. This project involves: Safety improvements to the northern tri-intersection at Morphett and Wright Streets. Greening and paths that frame the inner edges of the square. The Northern tri-intersection will commence first, followed by the greening and pedestrian connections. TIMELINE OF THE WORKS Construction work to begin May and be completed by December 2020. Masterplan perspective PROJECT NAME Moonta Street Upgrade (City of Adelaide) COST AND FUNDING CONTRIBUTION Contribution Source Amount Council contribution TBC Planning and Development Fund contribution $2,000,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST $4,000,000* PROJECT DESCRIPTION Council is seeking funding to establish Moonta Street as the next key linkage in connecting the Central Market to Riverbank Precinct through north-south road laneways. The project involves: • the installation of quality stone paving throughout and the installation of landscaping to position Moonta Street as a comfortable green promenade and a premium precinct for evening activity. TIMELINE OF WORKS • The first stage of this project is detailed design prior to any works on ground commencing.
    [Show full text]