Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 1

Case Study - Australia No-take areas help fisheries on the

Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Global Change Institute University of www.gci.uq.edu.au,

Introduction No-take areas (NTAs)1 can contribute to sustaining fisheries (Ward et al 1999, Roberts et al 2001, Worm 2009, FAO 2010). To do so, they must be well-managed and also well-designed (Fernandes et al 2005). This means that compliance to their no-fishing status must be high (Warner and Pomeroy 2012) and that there must be enough NTAs (in number, size and percentage area) in the right locations (i.e. habitats of importance to the fishery)(Fernandes et al 2012). No-take areas will contribute most effectively if part of a broader fisheries management plan that includes input and output controls (e.g. controls on gear, size, and levels of allowable take)(FAO 2010, Little et al 2011). Specifically, such fisheries management actions will mitigate displacement of fishing effort whilst, in concert with NTAs, enhance the sustainability of the fishery (Hilborn et al 2004, Worm et al 2009). For target s pecies, NTAs can help: reduce fishing mortality, increase population size, improve population structure, increase reproductive output and recruitment. More generally, NTAs can help fisheries by helping to maintain the ecosystem. They can: improve habitat quality, reduce by-catch, increase fisheries catch, maintain genetic structures, maintain ecosystem structure and function, reduce interactions with threatened species, reduce user conflicts, increase fishery stability, maintain ecosystem goods and services and increase the likelihood that fishing will remain sustainable. (see references cited in Fernandes et al 2012, Ch 1.8)

Below is a brief treatise about some of the key fishery benefits, including ecosystem benefits, of NTAs in the case of the Great Barrier Reef.

No-take areas on the Great Barrier Reef The highly protected NTAs of the Great Barrier Reef, prior to 2004, comprised about 5% of the total area and were highly biased towards just coral reefs and towards those parts of the Marine Park in the far north – remotely located from the greatest population pressure. An independent Scientific Steering Committee deemed these to be inadequate in terms of ensuring the future of the Great Barrier Reef and its values (GBRMPA 2001a). A rezoning was undertaken which resulted in the area of high protection increasing to approximately 33% of the Marine Park. The NTAs in place since 2004 were designed to adequately address connectivity, sustainability, risk management, imperfect knowledge and uncertainty whilst still allowing uses such as managed fishing outside their boundaries (GBRMPA 2001a, 2001b, Fernandes et al 2005).

1 ‘No- Take Areas’ refers to types of MPAs where extractive activities including fisheries are not allowed.

Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 2

More and bigger target species On the Great Barrier Reef there has been ample evidence that within NTAs there are more and bigger (target) fish than outside the NTAs (Evans and Russ 2004: coral trout (Plectropomus spp.) and stripey snapper ( carponotatus), Mapstone et al 2004: common coral trout (Plectropomus leopardus) and red throat emperor (Lethrinus miniatus)). Target species within NTAs also have broader size and age distributions, more males and larger females (Adams et al 2000:(Plectropomus leopardus), Mapstone et al 2004, Begg et al 2005: common coral trout (Plectropomus leopardus) and red throat emperor (Lethrinus miniatus)). These factors are all indicators of healthy populations and were assessed to have a positive effect on the likely productivity and ecological sustainability of fish populations subject to exploitation in open areas (Begg et al 2005). These results were found to be consistent over large temporal and spatial scales within the Great Barrier Reef (Mapstone et al 2004, Begg et al 2005).

Since the time of these studies, new zoning has increased the level of NTAs to at least 20% in every bioregion of the Great Barrier Reef and the new zoning has shown similar effects within 1.5 – 2 years of implementation (Russ et al 2008).

Increased fecundity Work on the Great Barrier Reef also shows exponential increases in the number of eggs produced by slightly larger female (target) fish (Evans et al 2008: stripey snapper (Lutjanus carponotatus)): increases in size from 18 to 30cm were observed and correlated with increases in egg production from ~7000 to >700 000. Evans et al (2008) estimate a per unit area increase in production of 2.5 of NTAs compared to fished areas. This is a well-known story and applies to a range of species that have been examined (Plan Development Team 1990 ) and is certain to apply to a broad range of fished species in the Great Barrier Reef.

Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 3

Larval export supports fished populations outside NTAs Novel genetic analysis was used to prove that NTAs export larvae to nearby fished areas, and in significant numbers: 28% of an area in no-take zones on the Great Barrier Reef has delivered 50% of the larvae found in adjacent fished areas (Harrison et al 2012). This verifies other empirical evidence of similar effects elsewhere (Pelc et al 2009).

Realized dispersal patterns of juvenile fish from a network of marine no-take areas (A and B) The three focal marine NTAs (green boxes) were an important source of juvenile recruitment for local fished areas. Forty-eight (49%) juvenile P. maculatus (A) and 41 (52%) juvenile L. carponotatus (B) that had recruited to fished areas were assigned to adults from one of three focal NTAs. Coral reef areas are represented in gray, and arrow thickness is relative to the number of juveniles that were assigned to each focal NTA.

Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 4

(C and D) Local retention within focal NTAs and connectivity between NTAs (dotted green boxes) also made an important contribution to juvenile recruitment in NTAs. Ten juvenile (71%) P. maculatus (C) and 33 (45%) juvenile L. carponotatus (D) that had recruited in NTAs were assigned to adults from one of three focal NTAs. (Harrison et al 2012)

New empirical data has also recently confirmed that 1-1.5 year old juveniles of targeted species in fishing areas, on the Great Barrier Reef, as being sourced from fish within protected areas (Jones G, pers. comm.). And in this instance, the same proportions apply as were found for the larvae - 28% of the NTAs have delivered 50% of the new recruits to the fishery (Harrison et al 2012, Jones G, pers. comm.). This research shows that if NTAs are used to protect key areas in a systematic design it is very likely this will enable sustainable provision of larvae outside to areas open for fishing.

More robust larvae Evans et al (2008) showed that older female fish on the Great Barrier Reef produce larger eggs. And Berkley et al (2004) showed that for the black rockfish (Sebastes melanops) larger eggs result in larvae that have higher growth and survival rates (see also Farrell and Botsford 2006).

McCormick (1998) and McCormick and Gagliano (2008) showed that stressed female fish (in this case a damselfish, Pomacentrus amboinensis, on the Great Barrier Reef) produce less robust larvae due to less yolk and morphological changes.

Such results strongly suggest that NTAs in the Great Barrier Reef which support older females in less disturbed environments are likely to produce fitter larvae with higher survival rates thus contributing more to fish stocks.

More natural, robust ecosystems Fish are part of, and rely upon, broader ecosystems. Ecosystems with less anthropogenic stressors are more likely to withstand disturbances (Nystom et al 2000). Marine NTAs help remove anthropogenic stressors such as destructive fishing practices, fishing mortality of target, by-catch and discarded species, negative interactions with threatened species and disturbances of fish behaviours (Ward et al 2001). For example, on the Great Barrier Reef, until 2004, about 70% of the soft seabed of the Marine Park was available to bottom trawling where 5-25% of seabed life was being removed, cumulatively, per trawl (Poiner et al 1998). Now, only 34% of the Marine Park is available to bottom trawling (~94% of the Marine Park is soft seabed communities)(www.gbrmpa.gov.au). Impacted habitats and communities are able to start recovering.

No-take areas on the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park’s coral reefs also allow the restoration of ecosystem dynamics through cascade effects to other trophic levels (Graham et al 2003, Boaden 2013). For example, Graham et al (2003) documented decreases in eight prey species numbers in response to the restoration of predatory fish populations (e.g. Plectropomus leopardus) within NTAs.

In sum, these data show a definite and positive contribution of no-take areas to sustaining fisheries in the Great Barrier Reef ecosystem.

Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 5

References Adams, S., B. D. Mapstone, G. R. Russ, and C. R. Davies. 2000. Geographic variation in the sex ratio, sex specific size and age structure of Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae) between reefs open and closed to fishing on the Great Barrier Reef. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 57:1448-1458. Begg, G. A., B. D. Mapstone, A. J. Williams, S. Adams, C. R. Davies, and D. C. Lou. 2005. Multivariate life history indices of exploited coral reef fish populations used to measure the performance of no-take zones in a marine protected area. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62:679-692. Boaden, A. 2013. Predator/prey interactions and the effect of harvesting predators on reef fish assemblages. In Hill, R and Ward, S. (Eds.) Australian Coral Reef Society Proceedings 28-30 August 2013. Sydney, Australia. Australian Coral Reef Society, Brisbane. Evans, R. E. and G. R. Russ. 2004. Larger biomass of targeted reef fish in no-take marine reserves on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14:505-519. Evans, R. D., G. R. Russ, and J. P. Kritzer. 2008. Batch fecundity of Lutjanus carponotatus () and implications of no-take marine reserves on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Coral Reefs 27:11. FAO. 2010. Fisheries management. 2. The ecosystem approach to fisheries. Marine protected areas and fisheries. FAO, Rome. Farrell, M. R. and L. W. Botsford. 2006. The fisheries management implications of maternal-age-dependent larval survival. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63:2249-2258. Fernandes, L., J. Day, A. Lewis, S. Slegers, B. Kerrigan, D. Breen, D. Cameron, B. Jago, J. Hall, D. Lowe, J. Innes, J. Tanzer, V. Chadwick, L. Thompson, K. Gorman, M. Simmons, B. Barnett, K. Sampson, G. De'ath, B. D. Mapstone, H. Marsh, H. Possingham, I. Ball, T. Ward, K. Dobbs, J. Aumend, D. Slater, and K. Stapleton. 2005. Establishing representative no-take areas in the Great Barrier Reef: large scale implementation of theory on Marine Protected Areas. Conservation Biology 19:1733-1744. Fernandes, L., A. Green, J. Tanzer, A. White, P. M. Alino, J. Jompa, P. Lokani, A. Soemodinoto, M. Knight, B. Pomeroy, H. Possingham, and B. Pressey. 2012. Biophysical principles for designing resilient networks of marine protected areas to integrate fisheries, biodiversity and climate change objectives in the Coral Triangle. Coral Triangle Support Partnership, Jakarta. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. 2001a. Technical Information Sheet No 6: Biophysical Operational Principles as recommended by the Scientific Steering Committee for the Representative Areas Program. 6pp. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. 2001b. Technical Information Sheet No 7: Socio-economic, Cultural and Management Feasibility Operational Principles as recommended by the Socio-economic and Cultural Steering Committee for the Representative Areas Program. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville Harrison, H. B., D. H. Williamson, R. D. Evans, G. R. Almany, S. R. Thorrold, G. R. Russ, K. A. Feldheim, L. Van Herwerden, S. Planes, M. Srinivasan, M. L. Berumen, and G. P. Jones. 2012. Larval export from marine reserves and the recruitment benefits for fish and fisheries. Current Biology 22:1-6. Hilborn, R., K. Stokes, J.-J. Maguire, T. Smith, L. W. Botsford, M. Mangel, J. Orensanz, A. Parma, J. Rice, J. Bell, K. L. Cochrane, S. Garcia, S. J. Hall, G. P. Kirkwood, K. Sainsbury, G. Stefansson, and C. Walters. 2004. When can marine reserves improve fisheries management? Ocean & Coastal Management 47:197-205. Little, L. R., R. Q. Grafton, T. Kompas, A. D. M. Smith, A. E. Punt, and B. D. Mapstone. 2011. Complementarity of no- take marine reserves and individual transferable catch quotas for managing the line fishery of the Great Barrier Reef. Conservation Biology 25:333-340. Mapstone, B. D., C. R. Davies, L. R. Little, A. E. Punt, A. E. D. Smith, F. Pantus, D. C. Lou, A. J. Williams, A. Jones, A. M. Ayling, G. R. Russ, and A. D. McDonald. 2004. The effects of line fishing on the Great Barrier Reef and evaluations of alternative potential management strategies. 52, Cooperative Research Centre for the Ecologically Sustainable Development of the Great Barrier Reef, Townsville. Pelc, R., M. Baskett, T. Tanci, S. Gaines, and R. Warner. 2009. Quantifying larval export from South African marine reserves. Marine Ecology Progress Series 394:65-78. Plan Development Team. 1990. The Potential of Marine Fishery Reserves for Reef Fish Management in the U.S. Southern Atlantic. NOAA Technical Memorandum, NMFS-SEFC-261. U.S. Department of Commerce.

Global Partnership for Oceans Case Study Pilot Project 6

Poiner, I. R., J. Glaister, C. R. Pitcher, C. Y. Burridge, T. Wassenberg, N. Gribble, B. Hill, S. J. M. Blaber, D. M. Milton, D. Brewer, and N. Ellis. 1998. The environmental effects of prawn trawling in the Far Northern Section of the Great Barrier Reef: 1991-1996. Final Report to the GBRMPA and FRDC., CSIRO Division of Marine Research - Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries Report, Brisbane. Roberts, C. M., J. A. Bohnsack, F. R. Gell, J. P. Hawkins, and R. Goodridge. 2001. Effects of marine reserves on adjacent fisheries. Science 294:1920-1923. Russ, G. R., A. J. Cheal, A. M. Dolman, M. J. Emslie, R. D. Evans, I. Miller, H. Sweatman, and D. H. Williamson. 2008. Rapid increase in fish numbers follows creation of world's largest marine reserve network. Current Biology 18:1-2. Ward, T. J., D. Heinemann, and N. Evans. 2001. The role of marine reserves as fisheries management tools: a review of concepts, evidence and international experience. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra. Warner, T. E. and R. S. Pomeroy. 2012. Creating compliance: A cross-sectional study of the factors associated with marine protected area outcomes. Marine Policy 36:922-932. Worm, B., R. Hilborn, J. K. Baum, T. A. Branch, J. S. Collie, C. Costello, M. J. Fogarty, E. A. Fulton, J. A. Hutchings, S. Jennings, O. P. Jensen, H. K. Lotze, P. M. Mace, T. R. McClanahan, C. Minto, S. R. Palumbi, A. M. Parma, D. Ricard, A. A. Rosenberg, R. Watson, and D. Zeller. 2009. Rebuilding Global Fisheries. Science 325:578-585.