4.2 Article

Spilling over deepwater boundaries: evidence of spillover from two deepwater restricted fishing areas in Hawaii

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
卷 568, 期 -, 页码 175-190

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/meps12049

关键词

Spillover; Deepwater; Marine protected area; Bottomfish restricted fishing area; BRFA; Snapper

资金

  1. State of Hawai' i Division of Aquatic Resources [F17R38study IX]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The net export of adults (spillover) is an important though contentious benefit of marine protected areas (MPAs). Controversy over spillover often exists because it is difficult to discern empirically. In addition, of those studies that have provided empirical evidence, nearly all are from shallow reef ecosystems. Here we examined 2 deepwater MPAs in the main Hawaiian Islands, established to benefit a complex of species called the 'Deep 7.' To study these fishes, we used baited cameras and commercial fishery data. Relative abundance, fish size, and species richness observed using camera data declined with distance from MPAs, signifying that species had begun to spill over the MPA boundaries into fishing grounds. Further, temporal analyses of these spatial trends indicated that they did not always exist but developed in the fifth and sixth years of sampling. Changes in fish size over time supported these results, with asymptotes in fish size seen inside and increases seen outside MPAs in the fifth and sixth years of sampling. Displaced fishing effort may have also caused initial declines in Etelis coruscans size and catch data that increased in later years. Further, low sample sizes and public announcements prior to sampling in Year 8 may have contributed to the decline in E. carbunculus sizes inside, and spatial trends outside, an MPA that were no longer significant in Year 8. Identifying the ability and time span for an MPA to begin to benefit a fishery and how quickly fishing may remove those benefits is crucial to resolving debates regarding the use of MPAs in fisheries management.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据