Abstracts: Dec 5, 2014

Abstract: Marine Protected Areas have been increasing in abundance over the last twenty years, but even now much is still not known about how well they work at protecting the species in them. In 1998, after growing concern from the public over the local aquarium fish trade, the Hawai’i state Legislature passed Act 306 which, among other things, called for the Department of Aquatic Resources (DAR) to establish a minimum of 30% of Hawai’i’s western coastline as Fishery Recovery Areas (FRAs). One year after this was passed, 9 sites had been deemed suitable, and scientists took this opportunity to conduct a baseline survey of the density of aquarium and nonaquarium fish found in these areas. The same methods employed for the baseline study were used over the next three years (2000-2003) once these FRAs were closed (no-take MPAs). Tissot and his colleagues collected data bimonthly and at the end did a Before-After-Control-Impact procedure to analyze whether there was an increase in any species post closure. Overall Tissot and colleagues found a 26% increase in aquarium fish overall compared to the baseline study. They also found that there was not a statistically significant decline in nonaquarium and aquarium fish in open areas post closure, which is a major criticism of MPAs at the moment (the idea is that if you close one area to removal, adjacent areas will instead be used for removal). The authors theorize that a major component of the effectiveness of these FRAs was due in part to the interconnectedness of these FRAs, the large amount of community involvement, as well as the high level of enforcement. These findings are similar to the findings of other authors who evaluated the effectiveness of MPAs in replenishing coral reef cover, endangered green sea turtles, as well as fish populations in Kenya. Overall, all of these studies have shown that MPAs can be a useful resource in replenishing exploited marine species.