Designing Networks of Marine Protected Areas in DFO’s Three Atlantic Bioregions
Presentation for Indigenous Protected Areas Workshop
Max Westhead, DFO and Adrian Gerhartz-Abraham, Dalhousie
March 29, 2017
Designing Networks of Marine Protected Areas in DFOs Three Atlantic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Designing Networks of Marine Protected Areas in DFOs Three Atlantic Bioregions Presentation for Indigenous Protected Areas Workshop Max Westhead, DFO and Adrian Gerhartz-Abraham, Dalhousie March 29, 2017 Outline 1 . Setting the Stage for
Max Westhead, DFO and Adrian Gerhartz-Abraham, Dalhousie
March 29, 2017
2
Bioregions
4
Broad Specific
5
1) To provide long-term protection of marine biodiversity, ecosystem function and special natural features. 2) To support the conservation and management of Canada's living marine resources and their habitats, and the socio-economic values and ecosystem services they provide. 3) To enhance public awareness and appreciation of Canada's marine environments and rich maritime history and culture.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
Adrian Gerhartz-Abraham
The “ideal” is to sample every kind of biodiversity
Protecting enough to ensure persistence of biodiversity and continuity of ecological process that ensure ecosystem services. BUT How much is enough? Also, sampling across the full range of variation of each feature (i.e., replication) Achieving objectives with a minimum “cost”, that is to say, with the least possible impact for all those involved
“Processes by which genes, organisms, populations, species, nutrients and/or energy move among spatially distinct habitats, populations, communities or ecosystems” (MPA Center Report, 2017).
each PU
will aim to capture
0.2 0.4 0.8
planning units (PU)
e.g., 33% (~1 Km2) target of habitat distribution to be captured in the system
1km2 0.6
1 2 3
e.g., Nursery habitat Kelp distribution = 3 km2
importance for fisheries; etc.)
4
0.6 0.4
High Fishing Activity
targets for a range of biodiversity features for a minimal cost
tool to support decision-making
Scenarios
Most efficient D: target met with the smallest impact
A B C D
Low Fishing Activity
0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2
Problem : Protect 1 km2 of kelp habitat for the least impact
0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 Low impact but Target not met Target met but medium impact Target met but high Impact
26
27
– Culturally important areas and uses – Aquaculture sites – Oil and gas production and significant discovery licenses – Utility corridors (e.g., under sea cables) – Other industrial developments (e.g., tidal energy) – Shipping traffic
29
30
Coastal EBSAs and Eco-Units
31
32
33
Consultation to inform on process and collect information Finalize MPA network design Release draft MPA network design* Consultation
design
2016 2017 2018 2020 2019
Design and implement individual sites Consultation
34
35
Step 1: Select Area of Interest (AOI)
Step 2: Conduct overview and assessment of AOI
Step 3: Develop regulatory intent
Step 4: Develop regulatory documents and designate the MPA
Step 5: MPA management
Advance opportunities Phase 1 Gather data & information Phase 2 Design MPA network Phase 3 Create and implement Action Plan Phase 4 Monitor and manage sites
2015 2016 2017 2018 2020 2019 Consult on potential MPA Network Design Scenarios Finalize MPA Network Design Consult
Gather information and consult on MPA Network Objectives
collection exercises were undertaken which cover the entire DFO NL Region
with local residents with an interest in participating. Mostly commercial fishers
Pelagics, Shellfish Marine Mammals, Aquatic Plants, Aquaculture, Infrastructure, Culture Tourism and Recreation, Shoreline Classification (Scale 1:50,000)
40
42
Community Coastal Resource Inventory Areas for a given fishery are mapped. In this case – the Cod fixed gear fishery Marxan Planning Units which
extracted to represent the footprint of that fishery inshore Non-georeferenced points with associated logbook values are distributed by NAFO Zone to the CCRI planning units. Georeferenced points are mapped as per usual.
Percentage associated to each CP
It quantifies strategic conservation objectives Helps measure the achievement of results for the MPA network
Different scenarios = various conservation levels
conservation priorities: 10% - 20 % - 30%
Defining criteria for assigning higher targets
species at risk:
basic scenarios: