ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil Advance Access originally published online on December 6, 2008
ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 2009 66(1):122-131; doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsn202
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appears in the following ICES Journal of Marine Science issue: European Symposium on Marine Protected Areas as a Tool for Fisheries Management and Ecosystem Conservation [View the issue table of contents]
Managing mobile species with MPAs: the effects of mobility, larval dispersal, and fishing mortality on closure size
1 School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK; current address: Cefas, Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK
2 Departments of Mathematical Sciences and Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, Essex CO4 3SQ, UK
Correspondence to W. J. F. Le Quesne: tel: +44 1502 52 4281; fax: +44 1502 513865; e-mail: will.lequesne{at}cefas.co.uk.
Le Quesne, W. J. F., and Codling, E. A. 2009. Managing mobile species with MPAs: the effects of mobility, larval dispersal, and fishing mortality on closure size. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 122–131.The use of closed areas (marine protected areas, marine reserves, no-take zones) has been suggested as a possible solution to the perceived global fisheries crisis. However, to optimize the design and evaluate the effectiveness of closed areas, we need to understand the interaction between larval dispersal, adult mobility, and fishing mortality. In this paper, a simple, spatially explicit dynamic population model was developed to examine the effects of these interacting factors on optimal closure size and resulting yields. The effect of using one large or several smaller closed areas was also examined. Our model confirmed previous results: closed areas do not improve the yield of populations that are optimally managed or underexploited and, as mobility increases, optimum closure size increases. The model also predicted some interesting counter-intuitive results; for overexploited stocks, the greatest benefit from closed areas can be obtained for stocks with highest mobility, although this may require closure of 85% of the total area. For the tested parameter settings, adult spillover had greater potential to improve yield than larval export, and using several small closed areas rather than a single larger one had the same effect as increasing the mobility of the population.
Keywords: closed areas, diffusion, dispersal behaviour, fishery management, no-take zones
Received 31 October 2007; accepted 18 May 2008; advance access publication 6 December 2008.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. Miethe, C. Dytham, U. Dieckmann, and J. W. Pitchford Marine reserves and the evolutionary effects of fishing on size at maturation ICES J. Mar. Sci., November 3, 2009; (2009) fsp248v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. R. Little, A. E. Punt, B. D. Mapstone, G. A. Begg, B. Goldman, and N. Ellis Different responses to area closures and effort controls for sedentary and migratory harvested species in a multispecies coral reef linefishery ICES J. Mar. Sci., October 1, 2009; 66(9): 1931 - 1941. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. J. F. Le Quesne Are flawed MPAs any good or just a new way of making old mistakes? ICES J. Mar. Sci., January 1, 2009; 66(1): 132 - 136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|