2. JOHN ROFF, ACADIA UNIVERSITY, CANADA GEOHAB, TASMANIA, MAY 2003 john.roff@acadiau.ca PLANNING FOR CONSERVATION OF Acknowledgements to: WORLD WILDLIFE FUND CANADA CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION USA COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION (NAFTA) CANADA PARKS AND WILDERNESS SOCIETY MARINE CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE SCOTTISH NATURAL HERITAGE (EU)

3. Development of protected areas has been driven..”more by opportunity than design, scenery rather than science” (HACKMAN 1993) How to synthesize the ‘Science’ in ‘Marine Conservation?

4. FOUR approaches to Marine Conservation: Scotian Shelf Seascapes SPECIES SPACES FISHERIES COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

5. Each approach has virtues and limitations BUT: How should we COMBINE THEM ? How do we USE geophysical data? Single Species approach: Single Species approach: Passé, never-ending, arbitrary Passé, never-ending, arbitrary BUT – interest in FOCAL SPECIES (Charismatic megafauna) BUT – interest in FOCAL SPECIES (Charismatic megafauna) AND - Meta-population studies – integrate species and genetic levels AND - Meta-population studies – integrate species and genetic levels Spaces-Habitat approach: Spaces-Habitat approach: Ignores individual species Ignores individual species BUT - integrates: community / ecosystem, and potentially genetic levels BUT - integrates: community / ecosystem, and potentially genetic levels Fisheries approach: Fisheries approach: Attention on commercial species only Attention on commercial species only BUT – ‘ecosystem’ level approach? BUT – ‘ecosystem’ level approach? Coastal Zone management approach: Coastal Zone management approach: Emphasis on engineering and environmental quality Emphasis on engineering and environmental quality

6. ECOLOGICAL HIERARCHYECOLOGICAL HIERARCHYECOLOGICAL HIERARCHYECOLOGICAL HIERARCHYCOMPOSITIONALSTRUCTURALFUNCTIONALGenes Genetic structure Genetic processes Species, Populations Population structure Demographic processes, Life histories Communities Community composition Organism-Habitat relationships Ecosystems Ecosystem structure Physical and Chemical processes After Zacharias and Roff 2000, Cons. Bio.

7. a – observable b – measurable c - applied to conservation From Zacharias and Roff 2000, Cons. Bio. Structures and Processes Ecological Hierarchy – Structures and Processes

8. StructureMutationStructureMigrationStructureSuccessionWatermassCurrents GenotypesDifferentiationAbundanceDispersion S.Diversity S.DiversityPredationTempTides FitnessDriftDistributRetention S. Richness Competit.SalinityDisturban. DiversityFlow Focal Spp Mig/ Drift S. Evenness ParasitismPropertiesGyres Stocks Nat. Select KeystoneGrowthAbundanceMutualismBoundariesRetention Inbreeding Ind. Cond. Reprod.Represent.DiseaseDepth/Pres P-B couple Mating Ind. Comp. RecruitDistinctiveProductionLightEntrain. Dir. Select UmbrellaBiomesDecomp.Stratificat. B-G cycles Stab. select Charismat.Biocoenos.TopographSeasonal. Dis. select Vulnerable S-A relns. SubstrateProduct. Micro. Evol. EconomicTransitionsAnomalies H-A equil. ErosionPhenotypesFun.groupsExposure H-L equil. SpeciationFragmentsHeterog.PatchinessTurbulence Macro. Evol Meta-popsEndemismNutrientsMixing Alt. S.Stats Dis. Gases Upwelling SymbiosesAnoxiaDivergence BiomassEcol.Integ. Erosion Expandedfrom Zacharias & Roff 2000 Desiccation Genetic Structure Process Species/ Population Structure Process Community Structure Process Ecosystem Structure Process

9. If marine environments are to be systematically protected - we require: If marine environments are to be systematically protected - we require: –Identification of habitat types –Identification of community types –Delineation of boundaries These are fundamental prerequisites to determine location and size of MPA’s These are fundamental prerequisites to determine location and size of MPA’s 1. Approach based on Representative Habitats

10. Classifications based only on biological data are generally prohibited at larger scales, due to lack of data. Classifications based only on biological data are generally prohibited at larger scales, due to lack of data. We are therefore obliged to classify habitat types We are therefore obliged to classify habitat types Mapped from enduring and recurrent geophysical features (STRUCTURES) Mapped from enduring and recurrent geophysical features (STRUCTURES) –(oceanographic and physiographic) –as surrogates for community types. 1. Approach based on Representative Habitats

11. Map the marine environment Temperature Temperature Salinity Salinity Water depth Water depth Water ‘colour’ Water ‘colour’ Currents Currents Substrate types Substrate types Habitat types Habitat types Fish distributions Fish distributions Marine mammals Marine mammals ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. Water depth

12. Scotian Shelf Seascapes of Representative Habitats Roff et al. 2003 Aquat. Cons.

13. Habitat heterogeneity How MANY different kinds of Representative Habitats? Roff et al. 2003 Aquat. Cons. What can we do with these seascapes?

14. Scotian Shelf / Gulf of Maine – bottom Water Masses (T – S combinations)

15. Scotian Shelf / Gulf of Maine – bottom Water Masses (variability)

16. 2. Approach based on: For analysis of habitats, we must consider Structures and Processes across the entire ecological hierarchy For analysis of habitats, we must consider Structures and Processes across the entire ecological hierarchy AND

17. Processes Processes –Upwelling, Gyres, Currents Environmental Anomaly Environmental Anomaly –Temperature, Topography, Sea Height, Chlor a Focal Species Focal Species –Flagships, Umbrellas, Parasols, Indicators STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES Roff and Evans 2002 Aquat. Cons.

18. Characteristics, Processes, Focal Species Upwelling areas VentsCoral Reefs Gyres Circulation Seamount Shelf Edge Canyons Sponge Beds Nutrient addition Sulphur bacteria Symbiotic and other algae Physical accumul- ation Sediment flux enhanced ? low diversity high diversity low diversity high diversity Flagships Parasols Indicator species Indicator species Flagship s Parasols ? ? Resources Elevated High Primary Production Areas Retention Areas Resources advected / focused Resources depleted Caves Sediment by-pass ? high diversity Indicators Roff and Evans 2002 Aquat. Cons.

19. Anomalies and Focal Species - Examples AnomalyLocation Physical Process Focal Species Biological Process Low temp/ high chlor a SW Nova Scotia Upwelling Many larval species Recruitment Cells Topography Saguenay Fjord Estuarine circulation Whales Euphausiids Feeding Topography Islands everywhere Isolation / Geographic SealsBirds Reproduction Feeding Topography / Currents Fundy / P’quoddy Bay Gyre / Tidal Circulation Whales (Copepods) Feeding High temp/ high chlor a Minas Basin Mudflats Tidal Resuspension Migrant Birds Feeding Roff and Evans 2002 Aquat. Cons.

20. Relations between Anomalies and Focal Species

22. 3. Approaches based on Fisheries Conservation Several strategies to determine conservation areas based on fisheries are possible: Several strategies to determine conservation areas based on fisheries are possible: Roff et al. 2002 MS. 1. Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI) 2. Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) 3. Knowledge of spawning / recruitment areas 4. Minimum Viable Population and Home Range 5. Correspondence of fish communities to water masses 6. Species-Area (S-A) curves

23. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN FISH COMMUNITIES AND OCEANOGRAPHY COURTESY KEES ZWANENBURGCOURTESY WWF / CLF WATER MASSES T-S FISH COMMUNITIES

24. How large should an MPA be? SPECIES – AREA CURVES AREA NUMBER OF SPECIES ASYMPTOTE AREA ESTIMATE For combined fish community e.g. Frank and Schackell 2001, CJFAS

25. SPECIES – AREA CURVES AREA NUMBER OF SPECIES ASYMPTOTES For separate ‘guilds’ of fish community Determination of Community Types and relations to geophysics is critical to MPA planning

26. 4. Approach based on Coastal Zone Management 1. Pristine areas 2. Affected areas - land use - water use -engineered areas 3. Socio-economic concerns 4. First Nations 5. Historic / Archaeological sites Restrictions /Limitations / Preferences

27. How to SYNTHESIZE these approaches? THREE PHASES THREE PHASES 1.Mapping / Overlays – REPRESENTATIVE & DISTINCTIVE AREAS 1.Define SETS of candidate MPA’s 2.Select THE NETWORK of MPA’s

28. PHASE ONE MAPPING / OVERLAY 1.1. Map Representative Habitats (Geophysical data) 1.2. Map Distinctive Habitats (Anomalies / Focal Species) 1.3. Map Fisheries Areas (Fished and Closed) 1.4. Map Existing Protected Areas 1.5. Decide which Distinctive, Fisheries and Existing Areas should become MPA’s 1.6. Produce overlay maps of Distinctive, Fisheries and Existing Areas onto Representative Areas 1.7. Determine the proportion of each type of Representative Area captured within the selected Distinctive, Fisheries and Existing Areas

29. Whale sanctuary Closed fishing area SCOTIAN SHELF Seascapes Representative Areas Existing protected area Distinctive / Existing areas Polluted coastal area

30. PHASE TWO DEFINE SETS OF CANDIDATE MPA’s EMPHASIS NOW ON REPRESENTATIVE AREAS 2.1. Species diversity versus area - for macrobenthos / demersal fish 2.2. Habitat heterogeneity – identify regions of high heterogeneity - where all Representative Habitats exceed critical S-A asymptote QUESTIONS: 2.3. How to set SIZE and BOUNDARIES for MPAs ? (Roff et al. in prep.) 2.4. How many MPA’s to establish ? 2.5. Total area to be protected ?

31. PHASE TWO - cont. DEFINE SETS OF CANDIDATE MPA’s 2.6. Eliminate non-viable sites for reason –Too remote to manage –Areas affected by human activity 2.7. Apply geographic/ environmental criteria –Proximity to existing areas –Maximum distance from existing sites –Areas of defined ‘naturalness’ 2.8. Apply further selection criteria –Socioeconomic –Legislative –First nations, etc. THIS DEFINES VARIOUS SETS OF CANDIDATE MPA’s

32. PHASE THREE SELECT THE NETWORK OF MPA’s NUMBER OF SITES, DISTANCES APART We are now moving from: A SET of CANDIDATE MPA’s to THE preferred NETWORK of MPA’s

33. PHASE THREE - cont. SELECT THE NETWORK OF MPA’s SETS of MPA’s implies that we have multiple possible sites designated, but says NOTHING about CONNECTIVITY among them (connectivity = terrestrial corridors) SETS of MPA’s implies that we have multiple possible sites designated, but says NOTHING about CONNECTIVITY among them (connectivity = terrestrial corridors) THE NETWORK of MPA’s implies that we have considered CONNECTIVITY among them (I.e. their physical /biological inter-relationships) THE NETWORK of MPA’s implies that we have considered CONNECTIVITY among them (I.e. their physical /biological inter-relationships) The most important PROCESS in connectivity is RECRUITMENT The most important PROCESS in connectivity is RECRUITMENT i.e. GENETIC STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES

34. PHASE THREE - cont. SELECT THE NETWORK OF MPA’s This is a complex issue; some reasoning: 3.1. Determine number of replicates of each habitat type required from the SET of Candidate MPA’s 3.2. Determine flow patterns among replicates 3.3. Determine meroplanktonic/ larval phases and recruitment patterns of macrobenthos and demersal fish species

35. PHASE THREE - cont. SELECT THE NETWORK OF MPA’s To comprise the NETWORK - a SET of MPA’s must be oceanographically connected so that: Smaller species will auto-recruit within each MPA Smaller species will auto-recruit within each MPA Larger species would allo-recruit among MPA’s Larger species would allo-recruit among MPA’s No species would lose ALL its recruits to areas outside the NETWORK, unless they recruited to another NETWORK No species would lose ALL its recruits to areas outside the NETWORK, unless they recruited to another NETWORK

36. Recruitment among MPA’s Prevailing current Recruitment may be uni-directional OR subject to retention mechanisms Auto-recruitment Allo-recruitment To another network From another network Allo-recruitment

37. One Dimensional dispersion Lx A(y) = ∫ J(x).L(x,y)dx 0 x – is the origin (source) of a dispersing individual y - is the destination of a dispersing individual The domain [0, Lx] defines the ‘source’ space of release The domain [o, Ly] defines the space over which individuals settle If J(x) individuals (the # of juveniles at point x), settle according to a distribution L(x,y), then the # of individuals at point y is defined by: Where: L(x,y)  e -D(y-x-d)2   /D D = parameter controls breadth of distribution and: d = v. t D = distance, v = velocity, t = time

38. 3-D Statistical solutions: N  x,p,t =  n i (  ( (p+  x /2) –p i +  (t-t i ) /   2 (t-t i )) -  ( (p-  x /2) –p i +  (t-t i ) /   2 (t-t i )) From: p+w/2 N w,p,t = N 0,0 ∫   t,  2t (u) du p-w/2

39. BUT: How do we know if we have ‘finished’ the task and ‘captured’ We need an INVENTORY across the ECOLOGICAL HIERARCHY

40. The Ecological H I E R AR C H Y COMPOSITIONSTRUCTURALFUNCTIONAL Genes Genetic structure Genetic processes Species, Populations Population structure Demographic processes, Life histories Communities Community composition Organism-Habitat relationships Ecosystems Ecosystem structure Physical /Chemical processes After Zacharias and Roff 2000, Cons. Bio. and Roff and Evans 2002 Aquat Cons. Representative Representative Habitats Habitats Distinctive DistinctiveHabitats EcologicalIntegrity Fisheries Fisheries Coastal Zone Coastal ZoneConservationManagement

41. StructureMutationStructureMigrationStructureSuccessionWatermassCurrents GenotypesDifferentiationAbundanceDispersion S.Diversity S.DiversityPredationTempTides FitnessDriftDistributRetention S. Richness Competit.SalinityDisturban. DiversityFlow Focal Spp Mig/ Drift S. Evenness ParasitismPropertiesGyres Stocks Nat. Select KeystoneGrowthAbundanceMutualismBoundariesRetention Inbreeding Ind. Cond. Reprod.Represent.DiseaseDepth/Pres P-B couple Mating Ind. Comp. RecruitDistinctiveProductionLightEntrain. Dir. Select UmbrellaBiomesDecomp.Stratificat. B-G cycles Stab. select Charismat.Biocoenos.TopographSeasonal. Dis. select Vulnerable S-A relns. SubstrateProduct. Micro. Evol. EconomicTransitionsAnomalies H-A equil. ErosionPhenotypesFun.groupsExposure H-L equil. SpeciationFragmentsHeterog.PatchinessTurbulence Macro. Evol Meta-popsEndemismNutrientsMixing Alt. S.Stats Dis. Gases Upwelling SymbiosesAnoxiaDivergence BiomassEcol.Integ. Erosion Expandedfrom Zacharias & Roff 2000 Desiccation Genetic Structure Process Species/ Population Structure Process Community Structure Process Ecosystem Structure Process

42. Eco. level Ecosys. Comm. Popul.SpeciesGenetic Approach ↓ Process Structure Process Structure Process Structure Process Structure Distinct. Habitats 1,2,3,4, 5,6,7,8, 9,10,15, 16,18 5,11,13, 16 Assumed or N/A 1,2,3,5, 6B,12,1 3,16 1,3,4,5,6,7 4,5,6A,6 B,7,8,9, 10,11 Inferred from structures 1,2,3,4 Repres. Habitats 10,11,12, 13,14,18, 19 1,2,3,4,5, 6,7,8,9,10,12,13,14, 15,17 Assumed or N/A, 7,8 1,2,3,4,5, 6A,7,8,9,1 0,11,13,1 4,15,16 5,6,7, 1,2,3,5,6A,6B,9,10, 11 Inferred from structures 1,2,3,4, 5 Fisheries Conserv. N/A Assumed or N/A 6A,6B,9, 16 fish only 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 fish only 1,2,3,6B,10 fish only Inferred from structures 1,2,3,4, 5 fish only Coastal Zone Manag. 2,3,4,5, 7,8,9,10,18 2,3,4,5, 6,9,10,1 2,14 N/A Sets of MPA’s 1,2,3,4, 5,6,7,8, 9,17 1,2,3,4, 5 Assumed or N/A,1 6A,6B,7, 8,13,14 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 1,2,3,5, 6A,6B,1 2 Inferred from structures 1,2,4,5 Networks of MPA’s 1,2,4,5, 7,17 N/A Assumed or N/A 10,141,2,3,4,5,6,7 3,11,12, 13 Inferred from structures 1,2,4,5 How the elements of biodiversity are ‘captured’ by various conservation approaches