Report of the MPA Atlas and the interactive online database portal of the Bay of Bengal Large Marine Ecosystem

This report describes the process and details of developing an interactive online database portal for the BOBLME region.The MPA (Marine Protected Area) Atlas website, created by WorldFish was designed to provide public access to the latest information relevant to marine scientists, managers and conservationists. The main features include; BOBLME MPA database;interactive geospatial maps;and information about important habitats such as coral reefs,BOBLME boundaries and bathymetry.

Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities.

This project was commissioned to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of seagrass habitats to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment - to provide an evidence base to facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas; development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Seagrass bed habitats are identified as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, they are also included on the OSPAR list of threatened and declining species and habitats, and are a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, in England and Wales. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments with supporting evidence for the HPI, OSPAR and PMF seagrass/Zostera bed habitat definitions, clearly documenting the evidence behind the assessments and any differences between assessments. Nineteen pressures, falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. Assessments were based on the three British seagrasses Zostera marina, Z. noltei and Ruppia maritima. Z. marina var. angustifolia was considered to be a subspecies of Z. marina but it was specified where studies had considered it as a species in its own rights. Where possible other components of the community were investigated but the basis of the assessment focused on seagrass species. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements were assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Overall, seagrass beds were highly sensitive to a number of human activities: • penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface; • habitat structure changes – removal of substratum; • physical change to another sediment type; • physical loss of habitat; • siltation rate changes including and smothering; and • changes in suspended solids. High sensitivity was recorded for pressures which directly impacted the factors that limit seagrass growth and health such as light availability. Physical pressures that caused mechanical modification of the sediment, and hence damage to roots and leaves, also resulted in high sensitivity. Seagrass beds were assessed as ‘not sensitive’ to microbial pathogens or ‘removal of target species’. These assessments were based on the benchmarks used. Z. marina is known to be sensitive to Labyrinthula zosterae but this was not included in the benchmark used. Similarly, ‘removal of target species’ addresses only the biological effects of removal and not the physical effects of the process used. For example, seagrass beds are probably not sensitive to the removal of scallops found within the bed but are highly sensitive to the effects of dredging for scallops, as assessed under the pressure penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface‘. This is also an example of a synergistic effect Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities between pressures. Where possible, synergistic effects were highlighted but synergistic and cumulative effects are outside the scope off this study. The report found that no distinct differences in sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures. These differences were determined by the species affected, the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For instance evidence showed that beds growing in soft and muddy sand were more vulnerable to physical damage than beds on harder, more compact substratum. Temporal effects can also influence the sensitivity of seagrass beds. On a seasonal time frame, physical damage to roots and leaves occurring in the reproductive season (summer months) will have a greater impact than damage in winter. On a daily basis, the tidal regime could accentuate or attenuate the effects of pressures depending on high and low tide. A variety of factors must therefore be taken into account in order to assess the sensitivity of a particular seagrass habitat at any location. No clear difference in resilience was established across the three seagrass definitions assessed in this report. The resilience of seagrass beds and the ability to recover from human induced pressures is a combination of the environmental conditions of the site, growth rates of the seagrass, the frequency and the intensity of the disturbance. This highlights the importance of considering the species affected as well as the ecology of the seagrass bed, the environmental conditions and the types and nature of activities giving rise to the pressure and the effects of that pressure. For example, pressures that result in sediment modification (e.g. pitting or erosion), sediment change or removal, prolong recovery. Therefore, the resilience of each biotope and habitat definitions is discussed for each pressure. Using a clearly documented, evidence based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. The evidence review has reduced the uncertainty around assessments previously undertaken in the MB0102 project (Tillin et al 2010) by assigning a single sensitivity score to the pressures as opposed to a range. Finally, as seagrass habitats may also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.

Assessing the sensitivity of Sabellaria spinulosa to pressures associated with marine activities.

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) commissioned this project to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs based on the OSPAR habitat definition. This work aimed to provide an evidence base to facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. The OSPAR list of threatened and declining species and habitats refers to subtidal S. spinulosa reefs on hard or mixed substratum. S. spinulosa may also occur as thin crusts or individual worms but these are not the focus of conservation. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments with supporting evidence for S. spinulosa reefs, clearly documenting the evidence behind the assessments and the confidence in these assessments. Sixteen pressures, falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements of the habitat were assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. The highest sensitivity (‘medium’) was recorded for physical pressures which directly impact the reefs including: • habitat structure changes – removal of substratum; • abrasion and penetration and sub-surface disturbance; • physical loss of habitat and change to habitat; and • siltation rate changes including and smothering. The report found that no evidence for differences in the sensitivity of the three EUNIS S. spinulosa biotopes that comprise the OSPAR definition. However, this evidence review has identified significant information gaps regarding sensitivity, ecological interactions with other species and resilience. No clear difference in resilience was established across the OSPAR S. spinulosa biotopes that were assessed in this report. Using a clearly documented, evidence based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. Finally, as S. spinulosa habitats may also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.

Tillin, H. & Tyler-Walters, H., 2014. Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with marine activities. Phase 2 Report – Literature review and sensitivity assessments for ecological groups for circalittoral and offshore Level 5 biotopes. JNCC Report No. 512B, 260 pp.

Human activities within the marine environment give rise to a number of pressures on seabed habitats. Improved understanding of the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats is required to underpin the management advice provided for Marine Protected Areas, as well as supporting other UK marine monitoring and assessment work. The sensitivity of marine sedimentary habitats to a range of pressures induced by human activities has previously been systematically assessed using approaches based on expert judgement for Defra Project MB0102 (Tillin et al. 2010). This previous work assessed sensitivity at the level of the broadscale habitat and therefore the scores were typically expressed as a range due to underlying variation in the sensitivity of the constituent biotopes. The objective of this project was to reduce the uncertainty around identifying the sensitivity of selected subtidal sedimentary habitats by assessing sensitivity, at a finer scale and incorporating information on the biological assemblage, for 33 Level 5 circalittoral and offshore biotopes taken from the Marine Habitat Classification of Britain and Ireland (Connor et al. 2004). Two Level 6 sub-biotopes were also included in this project as these contain distinctive characterising species that differentiate them from the Level 5 parent biotope. Littoral, infralittoral, reduced and variable salinity sedimentary habitats were excluded from this project as the scope was set for assessment of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. This project consisted of three Phases. • Phase 1 - define ecological groups based on similarities in the sensitivity of characterising species from the Level 5 and two Level 6 biotopes described above. • Phase 2 - produce a literature review of information on the resilience and resistance of characterising species of the ecological groups to pressures associated with activities in the marine environment. • Phase 3 - to produce sensitivity assessment ‘proformas’ based on the findings of Phase 2 for each ecological group. This report outlines results of Phase 2. The Tillin et al., (2010) sensitivity assessment methodology was modified to use the best available scientific evidence that could be collated within the project timescale. An extensive literature review was compiled, for peer reviewed and grey literature, to examine current understanding about the effects of pressures from human activities on circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities in UK continental shelf waters, together with information on factors that contribute to resilience (recovery) of marine species. This review formed the basis of an assessment of the sensitivity of the 16 ecological groups identified in Phase 1 of the project (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014). As a result: • the state of knowledge on the effects of each pressure on circalittoral and offshore benthos was reviewed; • the resistance, resilience and, hence, sensitivity of sixteen ecological groups, representing 96 characteristic species, were assessed for eight separate pressures; • each assessment was accompanied by a detailed review of the relevant evidence; Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • knowledge gaps and sources of uncertainty were identified for each group; • each assessment was accompanied by an assessment of the quality of the evidence, its applicability to the assessment and the degree of concordance (agreement) between the evidence, to highlight sources of uncertainty as an assessment of the overall confidence in the sensitivity assessment, and finally • limitations in the methodology and the application of sensitivity assessments were outlined. This process demonstrated that the ecological groups identified in Phase 1 (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014) were viable groups for sensitivity assessment, and could be used to represent the 33 circalittoral and offshore sediments biotopes identified at the beginning of the project. The results of the sensitivity assessments show: • the majority of species and hence ecological groups in sedimentary habitats are sensitive to physical change, especially loss of habitat and sediment extraction, and change in sediment type; • most sedimentary species are sensitive to physical damage, e.g. abrasion and penetration, although deep burrowing species (e.g. the Dublin Bay prawn - Nephrops norvegicus and the sea cucumber - Neopentadactyla mixta) are able to avoid damaging effects to varying degrees, depending on the depth of penetration and time of year; • changes in hydrography (wave climate, tidal streams and currents) can significantly affect sedimentary communities, depending on whether they are dominated by deposit, infaunal feeders or suspension feeders, and dependant on the nature of the sediment, which is itself modified by hydrography and depth; • sedentary species and ecological groups that dominate the top-layer of the sediment (either shallow burrowing or epifaunal) remain the most sensitive to physical damage; • mobile species (e.g. interstitial and burrowing amphipods, and perhaps cumaceans) are the least sensitive to physical change or damage, and hydrological change as they are already adapted to unstable, mobile substrata; • sensitivity to changes in organic enrichment and hence oxygen levels, is variable between species and ecological groups, depending on the exact habitat preferences of the species in question, although most species have at least a medium sensitivity to acute deoxygenation; • there is considerable evidence on the effects of bottom-contact fishing practices and aggregate dredging on sedimentary communities, although not all evidence is directly applicable to every ecological group; • there is lack of detailed information on the physiological tolerances (e.g. to oxygenation, salinity, and temperature), habitat preferences, life history and population dynamics of many species, so that inferences has been made from related species, families, or even the same phylum; • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of non-indigenous species on most ecological groups, and Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of electromagnetic fields and litter on any ecological group. The resultant report provides an up-to-date review of current knowledge about the effects of pressures resulting from human activities of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. It provides an evidence base to facilitate and support the provision of management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. However, such a review will require at least annual updates to take advantage of new evidence and new research as it becomes available. Also further work is required to test how ecological group assessments are best combined in practice to advise on the sensitivity of a range of sedimentary biotopes, including the 33 that were originally examined.

A review of climate change and the implementation of marine biodiversity legislation in the United Kingdom

1. Marine legislation, the key means by which the conservation of marine biodiversity is achieved, has been developing since the 1960s. In recent decades, an increasing focus on ‘holistic’ policy development is evident, compared with earlier ‘piecemeal’ sectoral approaches. Important marine legislative tools being used in the United Kingdom, and internationally, include the designation of marine protected areas and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with its aim of meeting ‘Good Environmental Status’ (GES) for European seas by 2020. 2. There is growing evidence of climate change impacts on marine biodiversity, which may compromise the effectiveness of any legislation intended to promote sustainable marine resource management. 3. A review of key marine biodiversity legislation relevant to the UK shows climate change was not considered in the drafting of much early legislation. Despite the huge increase in knowledge of climate change impacts in recent decades, legislation is still limited in how it takes these impacts into account. There is scope, however, to account for climate change in implementing much of the legislation through (a) existing references to environmental variability; (b) review cycles; and (c) secondary legislation and complementary policy development. 4. For legislation relating to marine protected areas (e.g. the EC Habitats and Birds Directives), climate change has generally not been considered in the site-designation process, or for ongoing management, with the exception of the Marine (Scotland) Act. Given that changing environmental conditions (e.g. rising temperatures and ocean acidification) directly affect the habitats and species that sites are designated for, how this legislation is used to protect marine biodiversity in a changing climate requires further consideration. 5. Accounting for climate change impacts on marine biodiversity in the development and implementation of legislation is vital to enable timely, adaptive management responses. Marine modelling can play an important role in informing management decisions.

The effect of conservation measures on the spatial and temporal variation of rocky fish assemblages in the Arrábida Marine Park

Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been widely proposed for conservation purposes and as a tool for fisheries management. The Arrábida Marine Park is the first MPA in continental Portugal having a management plan, fully implemented since 2009. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of protection measures on rocky reef fish assemblages and target invertebrates through before-after and control-effect (no-take vs. fished areas) underwater visual surveys and analysis of landings trends. Second, we used surveys before, during and after implementation of the management plan to understand fishers‟ preferences for fishing grounds and adaptation to the new rules, and evaluated the reserve effect through analysis of both ecological responses and fishing effort density. Third, we identified the main oceanographic drivers influencing the structure of reef fish assemblages and predicted the community structure for the last 50 years, in light of climatic change. Overall results suggest positive responses in biomass but not yet in numbers of some commercial species, with no effects on non-target species. The reserve effect is reinforced by the increase in landings of commercial species, despite increased fishing effort density in some areas, especially with octopus traps. Fishing grounds are mainly chosen based on the distribution of target species and associated habitats, but distance to port, weather conditions and safety also influence fishers‟ choices. Moreover, different fisheries respond differently to the protection measures, and within each fishery, individual fishers show distinct strategies, with some operating in a broader area whereas others keep preferred territories. Our results also show that wind stress and temperature are the main oceanographic drivers for rocky reef fish assemblages, with tropicalization of assemblages and polewards movements of species over the last 50 years consistent with temperature trends. We believe this study provides significant lessons for marine conservation and management of coastal systems.

The impact of the Arrábida Marine Park (Portugal) on the decapod crustacean Eualus cranchii: a case study

Dissertação de mestrado, Biologia Marinha, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Univerisdade do Algarve, 2015

Population Trends of a Mixed-Species Colony of Humboldt and Magellanic Penguins in Southern Chile after Establishing a Protected Area

Worldwide marine protected areas (MPAs) have been designated to protect marine resources, including top predators such as seabirds. There is no conclusive information on whether protected areas can improve population trends of seabirds when these are further exploited as tourist attractions, an activity that has increased in past decades. Humboldt Penguins (Spheniscus humboldti) and Magellanic Penguins (S. magellanicus) breed sympatrically on Puñihuil Islets, two small coastal islands off the west coast of Chiloé Island (41° S) in southern Chile that are subject to exploitation for tourism. Our goal was to compare the population size of the mixed colony of Humboldt and Magellanic Penguins before and after protection from unregulated tourism and freely roaming goats in 1997. For this purpose, two censuses were conducted in 2004 and 2008, and the numbers compared with those obtained in 1997 by other authors. The proportion of occupied, unoccupied, and collapsed/flooded burrows changed between years; there were 68% and 34% fewer collapsed burrows in 2004 and 2008, respectively, than in 1997. For the total number of burrows of both species, we counted 48% and 63% more burrows in 2004 and 2008, respectively, than in 1997. We counted 13% more burrows of Humboldt Penguins in 2008 than in 1997, and for Magellanic Penguins, we estimated a 64% increase in burrows in 2008. Presumably, this was as a result of habitat improvement attributable to the exclusion of tourists and the removal of goats from the islets. Although tourist visits to the islets are prohibited, tourism activities around the colonies are prevalent and need to be taken into account to promote appropriate management.

Assessing the effectiveness of a long-standing rocky intertidal protected area and its contribution to the regional conservation of species, habitats and assemblages

1. The acceptance of reserves as a useful management strategy relies on evidence of their effectiveness in preserving stocks of harvested species and conserving biodiversity. A history of ad hoc decisions in terrestrial and marine protected area planning has meant that many of these areas are contributing inefficiently to conservation goals. The conservation value of existing protected areas should be assessed when planning the placement of additional areas in a reserve network. 2. This study tested (1) the effectiveness of protection for intertidal molluscs of a marine reserve (Bouddi Marine Extension, NSW, Australia) established in 1971, and (2) the contribution of the protected area to the conservation of regional species, assemblages, and habitats. 3. The shell length and population density of one harvested (Cellana tramoserica), and three non-harvested species (Bembicium nanum, Morula marginalba, Nerita atramentosa) of intertidal molluscs were examined in the protected area and two reference locations over two seasons. 4. The heavily collected limpet C. tramoserica was significantly larger in the protected area and was the only species to exhibit a significant difference. No species significantly differed in population density between the protected area and reference locations. 5. Temporally replicated surveys of macro-molluscs at 21 locations over 75km of coastline identified that the existing protected area included 50% of species, two of five assemblage types and 19 of 20 intertidal rocky shore habitats surveyed in the study region. Reservation of a further three rocky reefs would protect a large proportion of species (71%), a representative of each assemblage and all habitat types. 6. Despite originally being selected in the absence of information on regional biodiversity, the protected area is today an effective starting point for expansion to a regional network of intertidal protected areas.

A framework of lessons learned from community-based marine reserves and its effectiveness in guiding a new coastal management initiative in the Philippines

Community-based coastal resource management has been widely applied within the Philippines. However, small-scale community-based reserves are often inefficient owing to management inadequacies arising because of a lack of local support or enforcement or poor design. Because there are many potential pitfalls during the establishment of even small community-based reserves, it is important for coastal managers, communities, and facilitating institutions to have access to a summary of the key factors for success. Reviewing relevant literature, we present a framework of lessons learned during the establishment of protected areas, mainly in the Philippines. The framework contains summary guidance on the importance of (1) an island location, (2) small community population size, (3) minimal effect of land-based development, (4) application of a bottom-up approach, (5) an external facilitating institution, (6) acquisition of title, (7) use of a scientific information database, (8) stakeholder involvement, (9) the establishment of legislation, (10) community empowerment, (11) alternative livelihood schemes, (12) surveillance, (13) tangible management results, (14) continued involvement of external groups after reserve establishment, and (15) small-scale project expansion. These framework components guided the establishment of a community-based protected area at Danjugan Island, Negros Occidental, Philippines. This case study showed that the framework was a useful guide that led to establishing and implementing a community-based marine reserve. Evaluation of the reserve using standard criteria developed for the Philippines shows that the Danjugan Island protected area can be considered successful and sustainable. At Danjugan Island, all of the lessons synthesized in the framework were important and should be considered elsewhere, even for relatively small projects. As shown in previous projects in the Philippines, local involvement and stewardship of the protected area appeared particularly important for its successful implementation. The involvement of external organizations also seemed to have a key role in the success of the Danjugan Island project by guiding local decision-makers in the sociobiological principles of establishing protected areas. However, the relative importance of each component of the framework will vary between coastal management initiatives both within the Philippines and across the wider Asian region.

Intertidal habitat conservation: identifying conservation targets in the absence of detailed biological information

1. Growing concern associated with threats to the marine environment has resulted in an increased demand for marine reserves that conserve representative and adequate examples of biodiversity. Often, the decisions about where to locate reserves must be made in the absence of detailed information on the patterns of distribution of the biota. Alternative approaches are required that include defining habitats using surrogates for biodiversity. Surrogate measures of biodiversity enable decisions about where to locate marine reserves to be made more reliably in the absence of detailed data on the distribution of species. 2. Intertidal habitat types derived using physical properties of the shoreline were used as a surrogate for intertidal biodiversity to assist with the identification of sites for inclusion in a candidate system of intertidal marine reserves for 17 463 km of the mainland coast of Queensland, Australia. This represents the first systematic approach, on essentially one-dimensional data, using fine-scale (tens to hundreds of metres) intertidal habitats to identify a system of marine reserves for such a large length of coast. A range of solutions would provide for the protection of a representative example of intertidal habitats in Queensland. 3. The design and planning of marine and terrestrial protected areas systems should not be undertaken independently of each other because it is likely to lead to inadequate representation of intertidal habitats in either system. The development of reserve systems specially designed to protect intertidal habitats should be integrated into the design of terrestrial and marine protected area systems. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Adaptive management, international co-operation and planning for marine conservation hotspots in a changing climate

Acknowledgements This work received funding from the MASTS pooling initiative (The Marine Alliance for Science and Technology for Scotland) and their support is gratefully acknowledged. MASTS is funded by the Scottish Funding Council (Grant reference HR09011) and contributing institutions.

Adaptive management, international co-operation and planning for marine conservation hotspots in a changing climate

Acknowledgements This work received funding from the MASTS pooling initiative (The Marine Alliance for Science and Technology for Scotland) and their support is gratefully acknowledged. MASTS is funded by the Scottish Funding Council (Grant reference HR09011) and contributing institutions.