Ecosystem-based management and community-based participation in governance of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been identified as key elements to improve management success, local stakeholder support, and compliance with regulations. However, both are often rarely achieved, resulting in poor MPA governance, support and success. A quantitative assessment of the spatio- temporal change (1997-2012) of coral reef fish communities within Arrecifes La Cordillera Natural Reserve in northeastern Puerto Rico was carried out. We also identified community expectations of and support for the designation of a network of small no-take MPAs within the reserve’s boundaries. A holistic approach employing biophysical and socioeconomic methods was used as part of a participatory model to identify priorities for the designation of candidate no-take MPAs. Populations of the most important fishery-targeted species showed a significant temporal decline, particularly in areas subjected to intense recreational activities and spearfishing. Most groupers (Serranidae), snappers (Lutjanidae), barracudas (Sphyraenidae), and some parrotfishes (Scaridae) were nearly absent at most sites. Most individuals belonged to smaller size categories. Herbivores represented the majority of the total fish biomass, suggesting strong fishing impacts on apex predators. Fish declines also occurred after two massive coral bleaching events in 1998 and 2005 that were followed by mass coral mortalities, suggesting combined negative impacts of fishing and climate change. A no-take MPA designation was supported by 80% of the artisanal fishermen, 73% of the concessionaires (i.e., SCUBA diving, charter boats), and 52% of registered vessel operators. Stakeholders agreed that coral reef conditions in the reserve had declined over time, as well as water quality which affected reef health and fisheries. Stakeholders did not recognize climate change and sea surface warming as threats to coral reefs and fisheries. Nonetheless, stakeholder perceptions of candidate no-take MPA sites remarkably matched those identified through fish counts. This study also highlighted the pervasive views held by many stake-holders concerning MPA management and enforcement, and recommended that any no-take MPA designation process considers improving stakeholder participation, understanding of management objectives, actions, and accomplishments, and building stakeholders trust. The integration of ecosystem-based and community-based participatory models may be critical to foster improved support of no-take MPAs and foster a long-term community-based integration to develop and implement mitigation strategies for climate change impacts in novel future scenarios.
The designation of no-take Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) has been one of the top priority strategies for the conservation and restoration of coral reef resources, and for recovering depleted reef fisheries at local, regional and global scales [
The Commonwealth of PR supports 38 MPAs, covering 416,329 ha of benthic habitat, of which only five (11,049 ha) are full-time no-take MPAs under the Commonwealth Jurisdiction (2.6%) and 9,169 ha (2.2%) have partial (seasonal) closures and are under US Federal Jurisdiction [
Several indicators have been suggested as measures of MPA effectiveness, including a functional protected status, full-time personnel, patrol boat, regular patrolling and enforcement, buoys and signs, sustained funding support by local government, functional management by local government or co-management in partnership with local communities and interested stakeholders, at least a moderate fish biomass (i.e., 200 kg/ha) and high fish density and biodiversity, at least a “fair” live hard coral-seagrass-mangrove cover (>25%), and a Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) of at least 1.0 kg/person/h for hook-and-line fishing outside the reserve [
This study provides a quantitative baseline regarding the status of reef fisheries within ALCNR across a 15-year time span (1997-2012) and identifies the community expectations of and support for the designation of no-take MPAs within the reserve boundaries. We used a holistic approach that employed a set of biophysical and socioeconomic methods as part of a participatory model to develop a set of interdisciplinary criteria necessary for the establishment of priorities for the identification of candidate no-take MPAs. This project was aimed at achieving the following three objectives: 1) quantitatively assess the status of coral reef fish communities within ALCNR; 2) develop a participatory model to involve local fisher communities and other stakeholder groups in a decision-making process aimed at evaluating the condition of reef habitats and fisheries, and at suggesting candidate no-take MPA sites within ALCNR; and 3) develop an interdisciplinary data matrix using a combination of biological, ecological, regional, impacts, pragmatic, social, and economic criteria to rank no-take MPA sites. This allowed a novel integration of ecosystem-based and community-based models. The results identified areas of convergence between different stakeholder groups, ranked candidate no-take MPA sites, evaluated the preferred methods of public participation within and between community groups, and determined community expectations of no-take MPA benefits and costs. Furthermore, the information gathered contributed to devising and prioritizing strategies by which to maximize coral reef-associated fisheries protection while enabling public participation and maximizing community support for no-take MPAs.
The study was carried out across seven sites within ALCNR, located 3 - 11 km off Fajardo, northeastern PR (
Fish communities were sampled at three of the sites that had fish community data from previous years at following a three-way factorial design with time (1997, 2007, 2012), sites (ICA east, PLT, DIA) and depth zones (I ≤ 5 m, II = 5 - 15 m) as main factors. Although fish surveys were conducted during 2007 across all sites as part of the multi-criteria evaluation, only data from these three sites were analyzed for spatio-temporal patterns. Only shallow depth zones were sampled at ICA. Variable replicate fish censuses were conducted in 1997 (n = 11 - 21), but only 5 per depth zone/site were conducted in 2007 and 2012. Fishes were identified to the lowest taxon possible, counted and fork length estimated for each individual through 30 × 4 m belt transects. Fish fork length data was used to calculate biomass [
Study sites at Arrecifes La Cordillera Natural Reserve, Fajardo, PR
targeted species [
We developed a participatory model to involve local fisher communities and other stakeholder groups in a decision-making process aimed at identifying and recommending no-take MPA sites within ALCNR. This was achieved by conducting surveys and semi-structured interviews with key informants from each stakeholder group. The stakeholder groups identified in the study consisted of those that participated in consumptive activities, such as fishing, and those that participated in non-consumptive activities, as related to recreation. The three main groups identified as part of the scoping session were commercial fishing operators (n = 12), dive charters and pleasure (mixed) trip charters (n = 16), and private vessel operators (n = 102).
The approaches adopted for each of the groups varied. Key informants among commercial fishermen were identified via previous research in the area [
Respondents were interviewed about particular issues related to candidate no-take MPA sites, their views on MPA managements, and their preferences towards management authority via open-ended questions. Use patterns and resources trend analysis were collected using a formal survey instrument. To sample the large population of private vessel operators, a self-administered intercept survey was developed that was passed out by all of the personnel working at the Puerto del Rey marina vessel registration office to vessel operators either registering a vessel or renewing a registration. The office was selected because most of the vessels that register at the office operate in eastern PR, of which many visit the reserve. Commercial fishermen were interviewed using both a survey instrument and open-ended questions from August 2007 to June 2008 in three fish houses in Fajardo and one in Ceiba. Similarly, dive operations and pleasure trip charters were interviewed using both a survey instrument and open-ended questions, and that survey session lasted from August 2007 to November 2008. Finally, the Puerto del Rey vessel registration office passed out vessel operator surveys from September 2007 to February 2008, over a six-month session.
An interdisciplinary data matrix, using a combination of biological, ecological, regional, impacts, pragmatic, economic, and social criteria, was developed to rank priority candidate no-take MPA sites within ALCNR (
Coral reef fish communities within ALCNR were showing unequivocal signs of crisis.
There was a highly significant difference in total fish biomass among years and across sites, and between depth zones (
. Multi-criteria data matrix for the evaluation of candidate no-take MPA sites
Criteria | Description |
---|---|
Biological | Based on the following parameters: 1) Fish species richness; 2) H’n; 3) J’n; 4) Total fish abundance; 5) Total herbivore abundance; 6) Non-denuder abundance; 7) Browser abundance; 8) Scraper abundance; 9) Omnivore abundance; 10) Total carnivore abundance; 11) Generalists abundance; 12) Planktivore abundance; 13) Piscivore abundance; 14) Fishery target abundance; 15) Total biomass; 16) Total herbivore biomass; 17) Non-denuder biomass; 18) Browser biomass; 19) Scraper biomass; 20) Omnivore biomass; 21) Total carnivore biomass; 22) Generalists biomass; 23) Planktivore biomass; 24) Piscivore biomass; 25) Fishery target biomass; and 26) Reef substrate heterogeneity index (RSHI). Absolute values of each single parameter were individually ranked and classified in several ranking categories using GIS. |
Ecological | 1) Biodiversity—variety or richness of ecosystems, habitats, communities and species. Information obtained from relevant literature. Rankings based on coral and fish species richness, and on habitat diversity as documented within selected polygons with information obtained from NOAA [30] benthic habitat maps; 2) Naturalness—lack of disturbance or degradation. Based on personal observations regarding the presence or absence of anthropogenic disturbance signals (i.e., overfishing, sedimentation, turbidity, anchoring, SCUBA diving impacts, rapidly declining coral cover, pollution, etc.); 3) Dependency— degree to which a species depends on an area; degree to which an ecosystem depends on ecological processes occurring in the area. Based on the known or expected connectivity value of each of the habitats that were evaluated for any given species. Groupers (Serranidae) and Staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis) were used as model taxa; 4) Representativeness— degree to which an area represents a habitat type, ecological process, biological community, geological feature or other natural characteristic. Based on personal observations across all sites and the identification of each feature; 5) Uniqueness— whether an area is “one of a kind” (i.e., habitats of endangered or rare species). Based on personal observations across all sites and comparison to other known sites across the immediate region; 6) Integrity—degree to which an area is a functional unit; an effective, self-sustaining ecological entity. Based on personal observations across all sites and the identification of features such as availability of a wide diversity of microhabitats, abundance of large coral colonies, open substrates devoid of macroalgae and sediment open to coral recruitment, abundant juvenile corals; 7) Productivity—degree to which the productive processes within an area contribute benefits to species or to humans. Based on the ability of any given site to contribute to the sustainability of local fisheries either as a nursery ground or as an important historical fishing ground; 8) Ecological status of benthic communities—status of dominant benthic categories. Based on long-term monitoring efforts and extensive surveys across many sites that have allowed producing benthic habitat characterizations (Hernández-Delgado, unpublished data); and 9) Connectivity to other reefs—degree to which an area is physically connected to other areas or species are connected to other areas via surface currents. Based on previous knowledge about physical connectivity and sea surface current patterns. It also relied on extensive conversations with local fishermen to assess sea surface localized currents patterns. |
Regional | 1) Regional significance—degree to which an area represents a characteristic of the region; and 2) Sub-regional significance —degree to which an area fills a gap in the network of protected areas from the sub-regional perspective. This analysis was based on previous knowledge of the relevant literature and of existing MPA networks across the northeastern Caribbean region (i.e., biodiversity information available from different sources, including http://www.reefbase.org). |
Impacts | 1)Vulnerability—area’s susceptibility to degradation by natural events or the activities of people; 2) Degree of threat— present and potential threats from direct exploitation and development projects; and 3) Evident overfishing effects—area showing signs of low fish abundance, small size classes, low predator populations, impacts of fishing gear, etc. Scores were based on ranks obtained during this study, in combination with previous knowledge and the available literature. |
Pragmatic | 1) Urgency—degree to which immediate action must be taken and values within the area be transformed or lost; 2) Size— degree to which various habitats need to be included in the protected area as an integrated ecological unit; 3) Effectiveness— feasibility of implementing a management program; 4) Opportunism—degree to which existing conditions or actions already under way or a ground swell of popular support may justify further action; 5) Availability—degree to which the area can be managed satisfactorily; and 6) Restorability—degree to which an area may be returned to its former natural state, increase in productivity or value to important species and processes. Pragmatic criteria scores were based in previous knowledge by authors and also in different interviews with DNER personnel. |
Economic | 1) Importance to species—degree to which certain commercially important species depend on an area; 2) Importance to fisheries—number of dependent fishermen and/or size of the fishery yield; degree to which an area plays an important link to fisheries; 3) Nature of threats—extent to which changes in use patterns threaten the overall value; 4) Economic benefits— degree to which protection will affect the local economy in the long term; and 5) Tourism—existing or potential value of an area to tourism activities. Scoring of economic criteria was dependent on a combination of user’s perceptions, opinions and experience by DNER personnel, on previous knowledge and experience by the authors, and on recent data [31] [32] . |
Social | 1) Social acceptance—degree to which the support of local people is assured; 2) Recreation—degree to which the area is, or could be used for recreation; 3) Culture—religious, historic, artistic, or other cultural value of the site; 4) Aesthetics—a seascape, landscape, or other area of exceptional scenic beauty; 5) Conflicts of interest—degree to which area protection would affect the activities of local residents (i.e., artisanal fishermen); 6) Safety—degree of danger to people from strong currents, surf, submerged obstacles, waves, and other hazards; 7) Accessibility—the ease of access across sea; 8) Research and education—degree to which an area represents various ecological characteristics and can serve for research and demonstration of management and scientific methods; 9) Public awareness—degree to which monitoring, research, education, or training the area can contribute knowledge and appreciation of the importance of conservation of marine resources; 10) Conflict and compatibility—degree to which an area may help to resolve conflicts between natural resource values and human activities, or the degree to which compatibility between them may be enhanced; and 11) Benchmark— degree to which the area may serve as a “control site” for scientific research (i.e., a largely undisturbed site in which natural processes can proceed without manipulation and which can be used to measure changes elsewhere). Scoring of social criteria was dependent on user’s perceptions, experience by DNER’s personnel, on authors’ experience, and the literature. |
Spatio-temporal patterns in fish community parameters. From top left: (a) Species richness; (b) Species diversity index (H’n); (c) Evenness (J’n); and (d) Total fish biomass (kg/ha). Data: mean ± 95% confidence intervals
. Three-way PERMANOVA analysis of spatio-temporal variation in fish species richness (S)
Criteria | d.f. | Pseudo-F | P | Pairwise Time | t | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Time | 2126 | 15.09 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2007 | 0.94 | 0.3533 |
Site | 2126 | 9.23 | 0.0003 | 1997 vs 2012 | 5.63 | <0.0001 |
Depth | 1127 | 1.82 | 0.1800 | 2007 vs 2012 | 3.62 | 0.0011 |
Time × Site | 8120 | 8.71 | <0.0001 | Pairwise Site | t | P |
Time × Depth | 5123 | 7.81 | <0.0001 | ICA vs PLT | 0.34 | 0.7442 |
Site × Depth | 4124 | 4.90 | 0.0011 | ICA vs DIA | 3.18 | 0.0019 |
Time × Site × Depth | 14,114 | 5.30 | <0.0001 | PLT vs DIA | 4.01 | <0.0001 |
. Three-way PERMANOVA analysis of spatio-temporal variation in fish species diversity (H’n)
Criteria | d.f. | Pseudo-F | P | Pairwise Time | t | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Time | 2126 | 26.01 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2007 | 2.11 | 0.0416 |
Site | 2126 | 8.08 | 0.0008 | 1997 vs 2012 | 7.18 | <0.0001 |
Depth | 1127 | 1.79 | 0.1794 | 2007 vs 2012 | 4.52 | <0.0001 |
Time × Site | 8120 | 10.62 | <0.0001 | Pairwise Site | t | P |
Time × Depth | 5123 | 11.84 | <0.0001 | ICA vs PLT | 0.88 | 0.3734 |
Site × Depth | 4124 | 4.21 | 0.0024 | ICA vs DIA | 3.91 | 0.0002 |
Time × Site × Depth | 14,114 | 6.21 | <0.0001 | PLT vs DIA | 3.11 | 0.0041 |
. Three-way PERMANOVA analysis of spatio-temporal variation in fish species evenness (J’n)
Criteria | d.f. | Pseudo-F | P | Pairwise Time | t | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Time | 2126 | 9.53 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2007 | 2.30 | 0.0243 |
Site | 2126 | 3.40 | 0.0034 | 1997 vs 2012 | 3.75 | 0.0003 |
Depth | 1127 | 0.11 | 0.7515 | 2007 vs 2012 | 2.78 | 0.0079 |
Time × Site | 8120 | 3.87 | 0.0016 | Pairwise Site | t | P |
Time × Depth | 5123 | 4.18 | 0.0027 | ICA vs PLT | 2.42 | 0.0164 |
Site × Depth | 4124 | 2.08 | 0.0830 | ICA vs DIA | 1.68 | 0.0991 |
Time × Site × Depth | 14,114 | 2.18 | 0.0163 | PLT vs DIA | 0.96 | 0.3508 |
. Three-way PERMANOVA analysis of spatio-temporal variation in total fish biomass
Criteria | d.f. | Pseudo-F | P | Pairwise Time | t | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Time | 2126 | 11.47 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2007 | 2.97 | <0.0001 |
Site | 2126 | 9.83 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2012 | 2.52 | <0.0001 |
Depth | 1127 | 4.87 | <0.0001 | 2007 vs 2012 | 0.86 | 0.6284 |
Time × Site | 8120 | 4.35 | <0.0001 | Pairwise Site | t | P |
Time × Depth | 5123 | 4.43 | <0.0001 | ICA vs PLT | 2.44 | <0.0001 |
Site × Depth | 4124 | 3.92 | <0.0001 | ICA vs DIA | 1.97 | <0.0001 |
Time × Site × Depth | 14,114 | 3.47 | <0.0001 | PLT vs DIA | 2.10 | <0.0001 |
gesting a potential indirect cascading effect as a result of declining populations of apex predator species. Increases in Pomacentrids could have also been related to the massive decline in percent living coral cover as a result of post-bleaching mortality events in 1998 and 2005.
There was a highly significant change in fish community structure through time, across sites, and across depth zones (
. Three-way PERMANOVA analysis of spatio-temporal variation in fish community structure
Criteria | d.f. | Pseudo-F | P | Pairwise Time | t | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Time | 2126 | 6.97 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2007 | 2.69 | <0.0001 |
Site | 2126 | 5.83 | <0.0001 | 1997 vs 2012 | 2.92 | <0.0001 |
Depth | 1127 | 5.30 | <0.0001 | 2007 vs 2012 | 0.97 | 0.5109 |
Time × Site | 8120 | 4.95 | <0.0001 | Pairwise Site | t | P |
Time × Depth | 5123 | 4.57 | <0.0001 | ICA vs PLT | 2.62 | <0.0001 |
Site × Depth | 4124 | 4.40 | <0.0001 | ICA vs DIA | 2.10 | <0.0001 |
Time × Site × Depth | 14,114 | 3.64 | <0.0001 | PLT vs DIA | 2.45 | <0.0001 |
(a) Species cumulative dominance plot; (b)-(d) Principal component ordination (PCO) analysis of spatio-temporal variation in fish community structure: (b) ICA; (c) PLT; and (d) DIA. Vector analysis was based on minimum correlations of 0.60
SIMPER analysis based on fish biomass showed that the top five indicator species of 1997 reefs at ALCNR were Sparisoma viride (18.5%), Acanthurus coeruleus (12.8%), Ocyurus chrysurus (8.3%), Abudefduf saxatilis (7.9%), and Chaetodon capistratus (6.5%), with a cumulative contribution of 54%. Average similarity of all reefs surveyed was 33%. The top five indicator species of 2007 were Sp. aurofrenatum (16%), Ac. bahianus (14.3%), Sp. viride (12.8%), Ac. coeruleus (12.7%), and Scarus iserti (7.8%), with a cumulative contribution of 63.5%. Average similarity of all reefs surveyed was 46%. The top five indicator species of 2012 were Ac. coeruleus (12.4%), Sp. aurofrenatum (10.1%), Sp. viride (9.8%), Ac. bahianus (9.6%), and Microspathodon chrysurus (7%), with a cumulative contribution of 48.9%. Average similarity of all reefs surveyed was 54%. Differences between 1997 and 2007 were mostly explained by declining schools of browser herbivore Ac. coeruleus and of planktivore Ab. saxatilis. Declining abundance of Ac. coeruleus also explained differences between 1997 and 2012. The reappearance of O. chrysurus, particularly at PLT and DIA, did explain most of the variation between 2007 and 2012. Average dissimilarity between 1997 and 2007 was 70%, and between 1997 and 2012 was 69%. Average dissimilarity between 2007 and 2012 was 49%.
Observed temporal trends showed that fish communities were becoming more similar across sites and that observed gradients in piscivore and generalist predator abundance in 1997 were rapidly lost after the 1998 and 2005 massive bleaching and mass coral mortality events, and following 15 years of continuing fishing impacts. Dominant fish species (by biomass) at ICA were Ac. coeruleus and Sp. viride, while Sp. viride and Ocyurus chrysurus were dominant at PLT, and Sp. viride and Ac. coeruleus were dominant at DIA, with overall similarity averaging 36% across sites. Higher abundance of Ac. coeruleus at ICA explained most of the difference observed between ICA and PLT (73% dissimilarity), and between ICA and DIA (69% dissimilarity). Higher abundance of Ab. saxatilis at DIA explained most of the difference between PLT and DIA (71% dissimilarity).
There is significant evidence that critical fishery-targeted species showed significant signs of decline through time across most sites (
Bubble plots of spatio-temporal patterns of selected members of fishery-targeted sub-family Epinephelinae: (a) Epinephelus guttatus; (b) E. adscensionis; (c) E. striatus; and (d) Cephalopholis fulva
itajara), or deeper water grouper species of genus Mycteroperca were observed during the study. This pattern was very similar for representative members of snappers (Lutjanidae) (
Important targeted members of parrotfishes (family Scaridae) also declined after 1997 across most sites (
Commercial fisherman relied on the reserve mainly on a seasonal basis and less so for key, commercial species such as Spiny lobster (Pannulirus argus), Queen conch (Lobatus gigas), and Yellowtail snapper (O. chrysurus). Also, fishermen did not exhibit any direct conflicts with other user groups. They also perceived a long-term decline in key, natural resource conditions in the reserve related to their livelihoods (i.e. commercial fisheries), and over 80% of them were generally in favor of a no-take MPA that exists on a de facto basis—ICA to LOB (and perhaps PLM)—due to the high volume of recreational use within and between those islands (
Bubble plots of spatio-temporal patterns of selected members of fishery-targeted family Lutjanidae: (a) Lutjanus griseus; (b) L. apodus; (c) L. mahogoni; and (d) Ocyurus chrysurus
Bubble plots of spatio-temporal patterns of selected members of fishery-targeted family Scariidae: (a) Sparisoma chrysopterum; (b) Sp. viride; (c) Scarus vetula; and (d) Sc. coeruleus
MPA, management should facilitate dialogue among the commercial fishing communities in the region and the PRDNER such that the former may improve trust in the agency.
Concessionaires were comprised of diverse interests, including dive and snorkel operators, catamaran and other large vessel operators, and fishing and other mixed-trip charters. The entire group relied extensively (in many cases, exclusively) on the reserve’s coastal and marine resources for their livelihoods, and there was a majority view among respondents that the reserve’s coral reef and related resources have declined over the past decade or longer. Most concessionaires also identified ICA and PLM as areas that experience high volumes of use and which are centers of use conflict, particularly from recreational divers and private recreational vessels. Due to these and other related factors (i.e., overfishing, water quality decline), over 70% of the concessionaires were in favor of a no-take MPA within the ALCNR (
Registered vessel operators who visited the ALCNR were prolific boaters, taking five trips per month, each of which lasted over half a day (4.5 hours); thus, they represent a group that is most likely knowledgeable about the region and its resources, if not its designated status. That is, the results also demonstrated that while the operators took a majority, or almost 90%, of their trips to the reserve, over a third of the respondents were unaware of the reserve or its boundaries. If the group were to be engaged in a process to set up a no-take MPA, part of the
. Comparison of stakeholder characteristics and view towards no-take MPA designation and management
Group | Characteristics and views | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Interactions with MPA | Reliance on MPA | Main activity on MPA | Views on resource conditions | Views on no-take MPA | No-take MPA location | Preferred process | Preferred mgmt. agency | |
Commercial fishermen | Consumptive, extractive | Moderate to minimal | Diving, line fishing, some trap fishing | Declining | 80% support | Icacos, Lobos | Meetings | Federal |
Dive charters | Mostly non-consumptive | High | Diving off islands and coral reefs | Declining | 73% support | Icacos, Diablo | Meetings, technical workshops | Federal |
Mixed trip charters | Mostly non-consumptive | High | Pleasure trips to nearby islands | Declining | 73% support | Icacos | Meetings, technical workshops | Federal |
Registered vessel operators | Mixture of consumptive and non-consumptive | Moderate to high | Pleasure trips to nearby islands | N/A | 52% support | Icacos | Need for awareness, education within group | N/A |
process would have to involve boater (and, indeed, general public) education on the existence of the reserve and its present boundaries and regulations. The results also determined that a smaller percentage of registered vessel operators (52%), compared to the corresponding percentages of commercial fishermen (80%) and concessionaires (73%) supported a no-take MPA designation (
There was a strong agreement between stakeholder perceptions of the status of ALCNR’s natural resources (i.e., fish communities, benthic communities, water quality, cleanliness, etc.) and empirical data obtained in this study regarding the status of fish communities within the reserve that strongly support the immediate designation of no-take zones. After careful consideration of empirical evidence regarding the depauperate condition of fish communities within ALCNR with increasing time in comparison to the 1997 baseline, we strongly recommend the designation of three zones as no-take MPAs as a consensus option (
. Multi-criteria ranking analysis of candidate no-take MPA sites
Criteria | DIA | PLM | PLT | SDP | LOB | ICAE | ICAW |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Biological | |||||||
Species richness | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Species diversity index (H’n) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Evenness (J’n) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Total abundance | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Total herbivores | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Non-denuders | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Browsers | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Scrapers | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Omnivores | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Total carnivores | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Generalists | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Planktivores | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Piscivores | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Fishery target species | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Total biomass | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Total herbivores | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Non-denuders | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Browsers | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Scrapers | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Omnivores | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Total carnivores | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Generalists | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Planktivores | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Piscivores | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Fishery target species | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Reef structural heterogeneity index | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Points (max = 52) | 28 | 27 | 22 | 44 | 27 | 4 | 21 |
Sub-score | 53.8 | 51.9 | 42.3 | 84.6 | 51.9 | 7.7 | 40.4 |
Ecological | |||||||
Biodiversity | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Naturalness | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Dependency | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Representativeness | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Uniqueness | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Integrity | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Productivity | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Ecological status benthic communities | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Connectivity to other reefs | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Points (max = 18) | 15 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 13 | 8 | 11 |
Sub-score | 83.3 | 77.8 | 83.3 | 88.9 | 72.2 | 44.4 | 61.1 |
Regional | |||||||
Regional significance | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Subregional significance | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Subregional connectivity | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Points (max = 6) | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 5 |
Sub-score | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 50 | 83.3 |
Impacts | |||||||
Vulnerability | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Degree of threat | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Evident overfishing effects | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Points (n = 6) | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 5 |
Sub-score | 100 | 100 | 100 | 83.3 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Pragmatic | |||||||
Urgency | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Size | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Effectiveness | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Opportunism | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Availability | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Restorability | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Points (max = 12) | 12 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 10 | 11 |
Sub-score | 100 | 91.7 | 91.7 | 91.7 | 100 | 83.3 | 91.7 |
Economic | |||||||
Importance to species | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Importance to fisheries | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Nature of threats | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Economic benefits | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Tourism | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Points (max = 10) | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
Sub-score | 90 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 80 | 80 | 80 |
Social | |||||||
Social acceptance | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Recreation | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Culture | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Aesthetics | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Conflicts of interest | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Safety | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Accessibility | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Research and education | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Public awareness | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Conflict and compatibility | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Benchmark | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Points (max = 22) | 18 | 20 | 19 | 13 | 21 | 21 | 21 |
Sub-score | 82 | 91 | 86 | 59 | 95 | 95 | 95 |
Cumulative points (max=126) | 94 | 93 | 88 | 105 | 93 | 59 | 82 |
Final score | 75 | 74 | 70 | 83 | 74 | 47 | 65 |
Rank scores: 0 = Low ranking; 1 = Moderate ranking; 2 = High ranking. Total maximum score was 22 cumulative points.
Recommended no-take zone network designation. Red polygon (ICAE, ICAW, LOB); Blue polygon (PLM, PLT); Green polygon (DIA)
At the same time it also maintains important areas subjected to very strong ocean circulation between SDP and LOB open to artisanal fishing to protect the traditional livelihoods of local fishing communities. Respecting traditional uses within these communities is a critical element necessary to build trust with local stakeholders, and develop and compliance within any no-take MPA. The proposed network design will help improve connectivity among proposed no-take zones and will improve fish spillover effects to adjacent areas open to fishing.
Since its designation in 1980, recreational and commercial fishing activities across ALCNR have been poorly managed. Populations of the most significant fishery-targeted species were significantly depleted, apex predators were largely absent from most reefs, particularly during the 2007 and 2012 surveys. The most significant predators were small or medium-sized commercial predators, and herbivore guilds were dominant across most sites. Several fish functional groups were largely depleted through most of the study sites, particularly in areas subjected to very intense recreational activities, including non-regulated spearfishing. Piscivore guilds were the most affected. Most grouper (Serranidae), snapper (Lutjanidae), and barracuda (Sphyraenidae) populations were significantly depleted or completely absent at most sites. This pattern was evident also for some grunts (Haemulidae) and parrotfishes (Scaridae). Further, most individuals of fishery-targeted species observed belonged to smaller size categories. Other significant fishery-targeted groups such as triggerfishes (Balistidae), porcupinefish (Diodontidae), highly-prized species such as Nassau Grouper (Epinephelus striatus), or entire genera such as Mycteroperca spp. were totally absent during the entire study. Such trends suggest an unequivocal long-term impact of fishing of apex predators and of heavy exploitation of primarily carnivorous trophic level fishes similar to those observed elsewhere [
Climate change has also become a critical driver of coral reef decline. The northeastern Caribbean region underwent two significant sea surface warming episodes in 1998 and 2005 that resulted in massive coral bleaching and post-bleaching mass coral mortality events with paramount negative impacts on coral reefs [
All stakeholder groups agreed that coral reef conditions in the reserve had declined, as had associated resources such as water quality which has affected the health of the coral reefs and fisheries which depended on healthy coral reefs. While the stakeholder groups believed that there were a myriad of causes for the decline, there was general consensus that overfishing (resulting from commercial and recreational fishing) and land-based source pollution (especially as related to coastal and marine tourism, sedimentation, and water quality) had been responsible. Importantly, stakeholders did not recognized climate change and sea surface warming as threats to coral reefs and fisheries which raises a major concern regarding the lack of a public educational and outreach program regarding the consequences and impacts of climate change. The stakeholders mostly accepted the solution of implementing a no-take MPA and may actually have been addressing their concerns over resource decline by identifying the most heavily used areas (the ICA-LOB-PLM complex) as those which deserve the highest protection. While it is clear that non-consumptive stakeholder groups stand to gain the most by restricting access to all other kinds of uses within a no-take MPA, the study revealed that even consumptive groups such as commercial fishermen, fishing charters, and consumptive dive charters generally did not oppose the implementation of a no-take MPA. Their perceptions were consistent with dive tourist perceptions in Belize which suggested that adequate enforcement of no-take MPAs should improve coral reef conditions [
As important as reaching consensus on the location and characteristics of a no-take MPA was the determination of the process to be used to foster public participation in a format that stakeholders considered would be fair and equitable and the identification of the management agency which stakeholders believed would be best positioned to ensure enforcement and management efficacy. While not discussed in any detail in this study, it was found via commercial fishermen and concessionaire interviews that the stakeholder groups held a dim view on public participation; that is, members of both groups often felt that meetings addressing resource management issues were often poorly advertised and held at hours when they could not attend. Others believed that public participation, while allowed and even promoted, made little difference in influencing the final decisions. However, stakeholders still preferred holding meetings as part of the decision-making process for a no-take MPA instead of other formats, such as technical workshops or representative councils. In terms of identifying the agency that could best implement a no-take MPA, most stakeholders were in favor of a US Federal Agency, particularly the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). It is likely that the USFWS was most commonly cited because it is the primary federal, natural resource agency that most stakeholders are aware of in the region, through experiences with the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge and the Culebra National Wildlife Refuge. Thus, at the federal level at least, stakeholders are not fully aware of other models, including national parks and, in particular, national marine sanctuaries, which have never been implemented in PR.
Also, there remains the need to better understand and ameliorate the mainly negative views that many stakeholders, and especially commercial fishermen, hold towards the local government enforcement agency, PRDNER. Many stakeholders interviewed as part of the study believed that the local government did not have the financial or enforcement capacity to manage a no-take MPA. Others felt that the agency was draconian and thus did not foster stakeholder confidence in being fair in the management of a no-take MPA. Finally, a few respondents perceived the government as having failed to adequately protect the regional natural reserves, including Canal Luis Peña No-take Natural Reserve, in Culebra Island, and ALCNR, and argued that the enforcement agency could not handle additional management tasks. These examples are raised here to highlight the pervasive views held by many stakeholders concerning the government and to recommend that any no-take MPA designation process consider improving stakeholder understanding of agency’s missions and objectives, its management actions and accomplishments, and an overall rehabilitation of the agency’s image in relation to stakeholder trust.
Information from ecosystem-based and community-based participatory models was successfully merged to create a multi-criteria data matrix to evaluate and rank candidate no-take MPAs. MPA designation typically relies in scientific information (i.e., oceanographic, biological, ecological), but rarely in societal, which might explain why so many MPAs may fail to meet their objectives [
This study addressed the spatio-temporal changes in fish community structure at ALCNR within a 15-year time span (1997-2012), identified areas of convergence between different stakeholder groups, ranked candidate no-take MPA sites based in multiple criteria, evaluated the preferred methods of public participation within and between community groups, and determined community expectations of no-take MPA benefits and costs. Information gathered contributed to devising and prioritizing strategies by which to maximize coral reef-asso- ciated fisheries protection while enabling public participation and maximizing community support for no-take MPAs. No-take MPA implementation linked to habitat protection and management can be an important tool to recover already depleted fish populations and significantly depleted coral reefs within ALCNR that have also been impacted by climate change. We strongly recommend the designation of three areas within the reserve as no-take zones, based on a consensus model more compatible with the options supported by fishermen and other user groups, which can simultaneously protect overexploited resources from fishing and by a myriad of recreational activities. We particularly recommend protecting critical areas that still support healthier fish populations, and at the same time protecting local fishermen’s livelihoods by maintaining their principal fishing grounds open to fishing.
A final recommendation is that there remain several critical research needs. The first is to understand the coral reef ecosystem configurations possible under different future scenarios of stress levels, habitat types and biogeographic location [
The approach used in this study conferred a series of benefits and advantages, including: 1) a relatively open-ended interviews allowing for a broad discussion on MPA management strategies; 2) important baseline biological data and stakeholder and interest group participation in the development of management strategies for the MPA; 3) baseline information useful to develop an ecosystem-based long-term ecological monitoring program; 4) a study that targeted at specific user groups with a variety of views, including those of consumptive and non-consumptive stakeholder groups, special interest and public interest groups, and others; 5) an approach that incorporated both qualitative and quantitative aspects of social science in that it used multiple tools such as semi-structured interviews, focus group sessions, as well as participatory surveys, to complete a comprehensive characterization of community and visitor views on an MPA; and 6) a study that relied on inputs at various levels and disciplines; the amount of information collected was maximized, and results are applicable to similar areas through the Caribbean. In the context of rapid climate change impacts and increasing exploitation of fishery resources, the integration of ecosystem-based and community-based models fostering strong stakeholder participation has become an important strategy to restore depleted resources and rehabilitate coral reef ecosystem resilience, functions and benefits. Coral reefs have changed in unprecedented ways. There is a need to explore new management approaches, assess changes in ecosystem services, and investigate how human societies can adapt and respond to novel futures [
This study was made possible thanks to the support provided by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program (NA05NMF4631050). Support was also provided to E.A.H.D. by the Caribbean Coral Reefs Institute of the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) (NA04NOS4260206), and by the National Science Foundation through the Center for Applied Tropical Ecology and Conservation of UPR (HRD #0734826). Our appreciation to Robert Matos (Former Director, Reserves and Refuges Bureau, PRDNER) and Héctor Horta (Former Officer Manager, ALCNR, PRDNER) for logistical support during some phases of the project.