A thematic cost-benefit analysis of a marine protected area

The implementation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) is ultimately a social endeavour to sustain or improve human well-being via the conservation of marine ecosystems. The degree to which ecological gains are realised can depend upon how economic, ecological and social costs (negative impacts) and benefits (positive impacts) are included in the designation and management process. Without the support of key stakeholder groups whose user rights have been affected by the creation of an MPA, human impacts cannot be reduced. This study analyses a three year dataset to understand the themes associated with the economic, environmental and social costs and benefits of an MPA in Lyme Bay, United Kingdom (UK) following its establishment in 2008. Methodologically, the paper presents an ecosystem based management framework for analysing costs and benefits. Two hundred and forty one individuals were interviewed via questionnaire between 2008 and 2010 to determine perceptions and the level of support towards the MPA. Results reveal that despite the contentious manner in which this MPA was established, support for the MPA is strong amongst the majority of stakeholder groups. The level of support and the reasons given for support vary between stakeholder groups. Overall, the stakeholders perceive the social, economic and environmental benefits of the MPA to outweigh the perceived costs. There have been clear social costs of the MPA policy and these have been borne by mobile and static gear fishermen and charter boat operators. Local support for this MPA bodes well for the development of a network of MPAs around the UK coast under the United Kingdom Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. However, this initial optimism is at risk if stakeholder expectation is not managed and the management vacuum is not filled.

Pathogenic challenge reveals immune trade-off in mussels exposed to reduced seawater pH and increased temperature

Mussels tolerant to seawater pH's that are projected to occur by 2300 due to ocean acidification.•Exposure to pH 6.50 reduced mussel immune response, yet in the absence of a pathogen.•Subsequent pathogenic challenge led to a reversal of immune suppression at pH 6.50.•Study highlights the importance of undertaking multiple stressor exposures.•Shows a need to consider physiological trade-offs and measure responses functionally

Phenotypic variation in shell form in the intertidal acorn barnacle Chthamalus montagui: distribution, response to predators and life history trade-offs.

The acorn barnacle Chthamalus montagui can present strong variation in shell morphology, ranging from flat conic to a highly bent form, caused by a substantial overgrowth of the rostrum plate. Shell shape distribution was investigated between January and May 2004 from geographical to microhabitat spatial scales along the western coast of Britain. Populations studied in the north (Scotland and Isle of Man) showed a higher degree of shell variation compared to those in the south (Wales and south-west England). In the north, C. montagui living at lower tidal levels and in proximity to the predatory dogwhelk, Nucella lapillus, were more bent in profile. Laboratory experiments were conducted to examine behavioural responses, and vulnerability of bent and conic barnacles to predation by N. lapillus. Dogwhelks did not attack one morphotype more than the other, but only 15 % of attacks on bent forms were successful compared to 75 % in conic forms. Dogwhelk effluent reduced the time spent feeding by C. montagui (11 %), but there was no significant difference between conic and bent forms. Examination of barnacle morphology indicated a trade-off in investment in shell structure and feeding appendages associated with being bent, but none with egg or somatic tissue mass. These results are consistent with C. montagui showing an induced defence comparable to that found in its congeners Chthamalus anisopoma and Chthamalus fissus on the Pacific coast of North America, but further work to demonstrate inducibility is required.

Chapter 11: Human activities and ecosystem service use: impacts and trade-offs

Ecosystem services provided by the marine environment are fundamental to human health and well-being. Despite this, many marine systems are being degraded to an extent that may reduce their capacity to provide these ecosystem services. The ecosystem approach is a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way (UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000). Its application to marine management and spatial planning has been proposed as a means of maintaining the economic and social value of the oceans, not only in the present but for generations to come. Characterising the susceptibility of services (and combinations of services) to particular human activities based on knowledge of impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (as described in preceding chapters) is a challenge for future management of the oceans. In this chapter, we highlight the existing, but limited knowledge of how ecosystem services may be impacted by different human activities. We discuss how impacts on one service can impact multiple services and explore how the impacts on services can vary both spatially and temporally and according to context. We focus particularly on the effects on ecosystem services of activities whose impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning have already been considered in previous chapters. Some of these activities are associated with poor management of ecosystem benefits, for example, from provisioning services (aquaculture and fisheries), or with excessive input of wastes, fertilisers and contaminants into the system overburdening the waste treatment and assimilation services. Other impacts are associated with the construction of structures or use of space designed to generate benefits from environmental services such as the presence of water as a carrier for shipping, or sources of wind, wave and tidal power. We discuss the trade-offs that are made, consciously or otherwise, between different ecosystem services, which arise from human activities to optimise or manage specific ecosystem services.