BOBLME-2011-Ecology-10 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BOBLME-2011-Ecology-10 1 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. For bibliographic purposes, please reference this publication as: BOBLME (2011) Status of Marine Protected Areas and Fish Refugia in the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem. BOBLME-2011-Ecology-10 Status of Marine Protected Areas and Fish Refugia in the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem REPORT PREPARED FOR THE UN FAO BAY OF BENGAL LARGE MARINE ECOSYSTEM PROGRAMME FEBRUARY 2011 PATRICK CHRISTIE, PHD ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR SCHOOL OF MARINE AFFAIRS & JACKSON SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON 3707 BROOKLYN AVE NE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES 98105 L. KATRINA OLE-MOIYOI PROJECT RESEARCHER SCHOOL OF MARINE AFFAIRS UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON 3707 BROOKLYN AVE NE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES 98105 1 Table of Contents ABBREVIATIONS 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 I. INTRODUCTION 8 The Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem 8 The Bay of Bengal LME Program 9 BOBLME Priority Issues 10 Study Purpose 10 Methodology and Limitations 10 Terminology 11 II. MPAS AND FISH REFUGIA IN THE BAY OF BENGAL LME 13 Country Profile: Sri Lanka 14 Country Profile: Indonesia 22 Country Profile: Malaysia 31 Country Profile: Thailand 39 Country Profile: Myanmar 50 Country Profile: Bangladesh 58 Country Profile: India 69 Country Profile: Maldives 80 III. CASE STUDIES 90 Improving Governmental Collaboration in Sri Lanka, India and the Maldives 90 Balancing the Needs of Local Communities with MPAs in Thailand and India 91 Balancing between Tourism and Conservation: Examples from Malaysia and the Maldives 92 MPAs for Fisheries Management: Examples from Bangladesh and Sri Lanka 93 Towards Sustainable MPA Financing in Malaysia and India 94 2 IV. INTEGRATED STATUS ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 96 A. Broad Scale Considerations and Planning Practices 97 B. Ecological Considerations 105 C. Implementation Considerations 108 Transboundary MPA Implementation and Sustainable Fisheries Management 111 FULL CITATION LIST 113 METADATA SOURCES FOR MAP LAYERS 123 APPENDIX A: FAO TERMS OF REFERENCE 125 APPENDIX B: IUCN PROTECTED AREA DEFINITIONS 126 APPENDIX C: PROPOSED WORKING GROUP MEMBERS 127 APPENDIX D: 2011 MPA WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 128 APPENDIX E: INVENTORY OF MPAS IN THE BAY OF BENGAL LME 133 Sri Lanka 133 Indonesia 138 Malaysia 142 Thailand 144 Myanmar 149 Bangladesh 152 India 155 Maldives 161 APPENDIX F: REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF MPAS IN THE BAY OF BENGAL LME 169 3 ABBREVIATIONS ADB Asian Development Bank ACRBC ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity Conservation ASEAN Association of South-East Asian Nations BOB Bay of Bengal BOBLME Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem BOBP Bay of Bengal Programme for Sustainable Fisheries Development CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CMS Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species CTI Coral Triangle Initiative ECA Ecologically Critical Area EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GEF Global Environment Facility GDP Gross domestic product GIS Geographic Information System IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature LME Large Marine Ecosystem MPA Marine Protected Area MMA Marine Managed Area RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands of International Importance SACEP South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme SEAFDEC South-East Asian Fisheries Development Centre TNC The Nature Conservancy WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WHC World Heritage Convention WWF World Wildlife Fund MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration SAUP Sea Around Us Project UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are grateful to the many individuals and institutions across the region and elsewhere in the world that made this report possible. Moi Khim Tan and her team at The WorldFish Centre played a critical role by developing all the maps and graphs that appear in this report (with the exception of the regional map on page 8), as well as playing a key role in organizing and running the BOBLME MPA Status Workshop in Penang in January 2011. Dr. Kuperan Viswanathan facilitated the Penang workshop, with active input from country representatives from all eight countries and the BOBLME management team (for a full list of participants, see Appendix D). The authors wish to acknowledge these country representatives, who provided feedback on draft country profiles and recommendations. The authors are also grateful to the IUCN office in Bangladesh and Dr. Md. Giasuddin Khan for feedback on the Bangladesh draft profile. This study was made possible with funding from the UN FAO BOBLME Programme. 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Bay of Bengal is one of the world’s sixty-four Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs), and includes the coastal waters of the Maldives, Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. Coastal and marine resources play a critical role in these eight countries, and more than 400 million people in the region depend upon this 6.2 million km2 marine ecosystem for their food, livelihoods and security. Ensuring the health of this Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) will have direct bearing upon the ability of both current and future generations to meet their needs. This study was produced as part of the ongoing UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem (BOBLME) Programme. The Programme is a regional initiative that works to build support for coordinated, inter-governmental management of the coastal and marine resources that span the Bay of Bengal. This study reviews the status of marine protected areas (MPAs) and fish refugia in the Bay of Bengal and recommends priority interventions. One of the goals of MPAs is to enhance and sustain fisheries productivity and maintain marine biodiversity. By conducting the first regional review of MPAs across the eight Bay of Bengal countries, this study seeks to (1) provide baseline information necessary to build support for a more comprehensive approach to the establishment and management of MPAs across the region and (2) where possible, discuss current and potential linkages between MPAs and fisheries management in hopes of one day more effectively linking food security and conservation objectives. Methods include a detailed review of published, industry and government literature. Country ‘profiles’ systematically present information on MPA objectives, legislation, governance, effectiveness and threats. GIS maps are presented alongside each profile, and a full inventory of MPAs in each country is presented in Appendix E. Case studies, which explore issues such as collaborative governance, socioeconomic considerations, and financing models are presented after the country profiles. Recommendations are structured around an IUCN social- ecological framework for MPA networks, and are designed to elicit priority actions that would strengthen regional capacity development and MPA management. In order to validate the initial findings of this study as well as build support for this initiative more generally, a regional workshop was held from 18-19 January 2011 in Penang, Malaysia that brought together MPA and fisheries experts from each of the eight countries. Feedback on the report was generally positive, though specific improvements were made to the MPA descriptions and recommendations. This feedback has been incorporated into this report. In general, despite the need for marine and coastal protection, MPAs are not used consistently in the region. Terms, objectives, and levels of protection vary widely from country to country (though most countries do make use of standardized IUCN categories). Chronic challenges include a lack of basic social and ecological information that is needed for MPA design and management processes; jurisdictional overlap and ambiguity; a lack of monitoring and evaluation studies; and a shortage of funding that has bearing upon day-to-day management and enforcement at MPA site levels. Other significant trends include: . There are very few community-based and co-managed MPAs throughout the region. Many ‘MPAs’ in the region are actually terrestrial parks that encompass parts of the marine environment (e.g. in Bangladesh and India). 6 . Most MPAs in the region were established for conservation or tourism purposes. This is starting to change, however, with regional governments now setting aside areas for the explicit purpose of improving fisheries (e.g. hilsa ‘closed-season’ areas in Bangladesh and fish refugia sites in Thailand). Many countries have (or are in the process of establishing) MPA coordinating bodies and committees to address inter-agency jurisdictional issues.