Environment Magazine

Does the Pope Wear a Funny Hat?

Posted on the 05 April 2011 by Bradshaw @conservbytes

Does the pope wear a funny hat?Does a one-legged duck swim in circles? Does an ursid defecate in a collection of rather tall vascular plants? Does fishing kill fish?

Silly questions, I know, but it’s the kind of question posed every time someone doubts the benefits (i.e., for biodiversity, fishing, local economies, etc.) of marine reserves.

I’ve blogged several times on the subject (see Marine protected areas: do they work?, The spillover effect, Interview with a social (conservation) scientist, and Failing on ocean protection), but considering Hugh Possingham is town today and presenting the case to the South Australian Parliament on why this state NEEDS marine parks, I thought I’d rehash an old post of his published earlier this year in Australasian Science:

Science has long demonstrated that marine reserves protect marine biodiversity. Rather than answer the same question again, isn’t it about time we started funding research that answers some useful scientific questions?

As marine reserves spread inexorably across the planet, the cry from skeptics and some fishermen is: “Do marine reserves work?” The science is pretty clear but acknowledgement of this by the public is another story. Let me begin with a story of my experience answering this question while communicating to stakeholders the subtleties of marine conservation planning during the rezoning of Moreton Bay.

I was asked by the then-Queensland Environmental Protection Agency to explain to stakeholders the process of marine reserve system design as it applied to the Moreton Bay rezoning. I told the gathering that the rezoning was about conserving a fraction of each mappable biodiversity attribute (species and habitats) for the minimum impact on the livelihood of others.

Things were going well (I thought), but then came the first question: “Prove to us marine reserves work! I don’t think they do.”

When I asked why he felt this way he responded: “Because most of the fish we catch move so much we will catch them when they come out of the reserve”.

I responded (though not quite this eloquently): “Your argument leads to two logical responses – there is no case for compensating fishermen for the new marine reserves in Moreton Bay because you catch the fish when they come out, or the reserves need to be a lot bigger”.

I went on to say: “Furthermore we have proved that marine reserves work in at least 100 studies worldwide. Why wouldn’t they work in Moreton Bay?” But the response from the fishing stakeholders was: “We need it proved that they work in Moreton Bay. Moreton Bay is different.”

Around Australia, as our governments boldly forge ahead rezoning Australia’s waters, the question of whether marine reserves work is asked by many people who do not know the marine literature. As a result a great deal of monitoring and evaluation effort is being spent on testing the null hypothesis: “Fishing does not kill fish”.

The classic Honours student Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) design is being rolled out across Australia, and it looks a bit like this: we count and measure fish in several places, stop fishing in some of those places, continue to count and measure so we can try to reject the null hypothesis that fishing has no impact.

Sometimes we can’t prove it, because we don’t have enough data. However, an alternative approach is to go to the local primary school and ask a small child: “If we stop killing all the fish in a place do you think there may be more of them and the ones left may be bigger?”

Of course there are many subtleties to the removal of fishing pressure – in more sedentary species territorial adults may exclude juveniles and numbers may drop. For some species reserves will be too small, and if we have reserve size as a covariate then we might get useful information about minimum reserve size.

However, when you establish a protected area, invariably biomass (the combination of numbers and size) will go up, especially in the higher trophic levels. You can’t remove lots of fish without having an impact – to ask this question again and again is like questioning the powers of gravity every day in every place. Next time you fly to New Zealand be careful when you step out of the plane in case gravity failed while you were crossing the Tasman.

Just because policy-makers, stakeholders, managers or politicians ask a question it doesn’t mean that scientists should take funding to answer it. Ecology may be a difficult science with few fundamental laws, but many of its laws and principles are global – like killing animals reduces population size.

There are useful scientific questions we can answer while monitoring marine reserves that will help with future rezoning and policy. The key is that applied monitoring has to pass some tests.

Do we know enough already from other studies? Is the answer already obvious? If we get an answer do we have a management response?

This sort of thinking will be the subject of some of the research of the new ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, which gets underway this year. Watch this space!

Professor Hugh Possingham is Director of the Applied Environmental Decision Analysis centre at the University of Queensland.


You Might Also Like :

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog

These articles might interest you :

  • Does Conservation Biology Need DNA Barcoding?

    Does Conservation Biology Need Barcoding?

    In November last year I was invited to participate in a panel discussion onthe role of DNA barcoding in conservation science. The discussion took place during... Read more

    By  Bradshaw
    ENVIRONMENT
  • What Does the Natural Gas Boom Mean for Sustainability?

    What Does Natural Boom Mean Sustainability?

    Both NPR and the New York Times ran stories last week that highlighted the role of natural gas in the U.S. energy economy. NPR interviewed Amy Myers Jaffe,... Read more

    By  2ndgreenrevolution
    ECO-LIVING, ENVIRONMENT
  • Does He Take Requests?

    Does Take Requests?

    E.T., the singing walrus, celebrated his 30th birthday this week at the Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium in Tacoma, Washington. To mark the event he showed off... Read more

    By  Petslady
    ANIMALS & WILDLIFE, ENVIRONMENT
  • Does Being Organic Pay Back?

    Does Being Organic Back?

    As the saying goes, you are what you eat. But is this really the case? How do we know what we eat? Reading labels on products before putting them into our... Read more

    By  Infographixdirectory
    CURRENT, ENVIRONMENT, ORGANIC, SOCIETY
  • 15 Astonishing Ways to Recycle Water at Home

    Astonishing Ways Recycle Water Home

    Water is evidently a precious natural resource. This resource is adequate for our needs and even so there is increased pollution and depletion of this... Read more

    By  Rinkesh
    ENVIRONMENT
  • 2017 The Year Ahead

    2017 Year Ahead

    I've had a bad December, a number of minor illnesses in the family unit, Christmas holidays and quite a bit of overtime, have kind of stifled my outdoors... Read more

    By  Ashley Crombet-Beolens
    ENVIRONMENT
  • Koalas Are Fading Away

    Koalas Fading Away

    GR: I would add that not only are habitat losses causing greater short-term harm than climate change, so are invasive species. Read more

    By  Garry Rogers
    ANIMALS & WILDLIFE, BOOKS, ENVIRONMENT

Magazine