Hi PacMARA list,

For those of you who do not get MPA News, I thought I would attach this month’s edition. In it is an essay by yours truly, discussing global MPA challenges. I would welcome any feedback / discussion. (The piece is also pasted below.)

All the best,

Jeff.

From MPA News 86 (full copy attached, contains some other interesting news).

Editor's note: Jeff Ardron is scientific advisor on MPAs for the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, and Northeast Atlantic regional coordinator for the Marine Program of the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA-Marine).  He is also vice-president of the Pacific Marine Analysis and Research Association (PacMARA).

This essay reflects Ardron's personal views.  It does not reflect the views of the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, WCPA-Marine, or PacMARA.

MPA Perspective:
CHALLENGES FACED BY THE GLOBAL MPA FIELD

By Jeff Ardron

I was invited by MPA News to provide my view on where I think the international MPA community stands at this point: what the biggest challenges are and, in light of the April 2007 summit of the Marine Program of the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA-Marine), how I believe WCPA-Marine can assist the field.  I have divided my thoughts under two general headings: practicalities and paradigm shifts.  Addressing the first is likely achievable, whereas the second will be challenging.

1. PRACTICALITIES: These are immediate logistical concerns as the global MPA field prepares to meet national and international commitments. Practicalities include:

a. Developing community: There is not yet a cohesive global "MPA community" to speak of.  WCPA-Marine is currently not well-known or established in most of its regions.  To address this gap, it will need to increase its presence and encourage MPA communities of practice.

b. Developing good practices: This involves honestly sharing with one another what has worked and, more painfully, what has not.  Success comes in many variants.  What is considered appropriate and successful stakeholder involvement, for example, varies widely from place to place.

c. Tracking progress: WCPA-Marine has endorsed the further development of a global database of MPAs.  Tentatively labeled the Wet List, this needs to be widely accessible to a general audience.  Building an infrastructure that will allow for near real-time mapping updates will be challenging and will go far beyond simply gathering the data, which has already proven to be not "simple" at all....  Nonetheless, until we can map our progress, we will not know where we stand.

2. PARADIGM SHIFTS cause us to redefine "common sense".  Previously, marine conservation was seen as a luxury or, worse, a provocation.  It is now becoming accepted that our planet's ecological systems are at risk of unraveling - and with that, life support for human beings will be jeopardized.  This puts MPAs and conservation in a completely different light.  I would hope that WCPA-Marine could serve as a hub for new ways of thinking.  Below, I propose two possible shifts in perspective:

a. Marine spatial planning: Human society is in the midst of a cultural transition from historic freedoms associated with having large tracts of marine wilderness, to recognizing the constraints of living on a crowded, industrialized planet. The full range of human uses needs to be managed - not just in our parks but everywhere, including the high seas.  Instead of banning certain destructive activities here and there in a piecemeal fashion, the time has come to discuss proactively where we will tolerate such activities occurring.  This is what spatial planning is really about.  To date, WCPA's emphasis has, in keeping with its name, focused on the designation of protected areas.  Considering how few MPAs (highly protected or otherwise) exist, this is entirely understandable. However, this single-minded approach can take us only so far.

b. Incomplete knowledge of ecosystems plagues the daily lives of marine scientists, practitioners, and decision-makers.  To address ever-mounting environmental problems, we must move beyond habitually calling for "more research," laudable though that may be, to learning how to deal with what little research we have.  This will require transitioning from managing what we think we know, to acknowledging that in reality we are managing what we do not know (or understand).

How we act, or delay actions, based on our limited knowledge (be it scientific, local, or traditional) is a cultural matter.  The precautionary approach is oft-recognized but, in my opinion, only dimly understood.  Most folks seem to translate it into "be careful."  But I think it is really the tip of a deeper paradigm shift, questioning how we view our ability to understand the world, and our ability to manage ourselves based on that perceived knowledge.  So far, in the marine environment, our success rate has been rather low.  Clearly we have been making some bad assumptions.

When faced with uncertainties, other sectors have developed successful mitigation strategies.  Consider financial planning: even though most financial advisors will openly admit they do not understand what makes the marketplace tick, they have nonetheless developed approaches such that their clients' investments will (usually) grow.  Medicine has likewise developed sophisticated diagnostics.  While it would be unrealistic to expect the level of expertise currently found in medicine (and perhaps also financial planning?), it is not unrealistic to look more closely at their decision-making methodologies.

Finally, we should recognize that we cannot know all contingencies before we make decisions, and that a lot of our knowledge will be acquired as we go along, applying concrete measures and observing their effects.  Pure marine research will certainly remain valuable, but it will be applied research that will help deliver us from what are really very prosaic woes.  And for that, fully protected control sites will become a necessity, not a luxury.

For more information

Jeff Ardron, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Isle of Vilm, 18581 Putbus, Germany. E-mail: jeff.ardron@...

Hello PacMARA List Serve,

As you may be aware, PacMARA has initiated an institutional development process to focus the strategic direction of the organization. As part of this process, Cortex Consultants Inc. has been hired by PacMARA to prepare a situation analysis document describing: (1) the events related to PacMARA’s formation and development; (2) PacMARA’s current strengths and weaknesses, and (3) possible future activities and roles for PacMARA.

As an expert in marine analysis and/or planning, you are a key source of information. Therefore, we would like to invite you to participate in an on-line questionnaire that will allow us to incorporate your knowledge and experience into our analysis.

The questionnaire is located at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=69BRDNGpHqI8zaT0c9EWoA_3d_3d

If you have any further questions about the survey please contact either Jason Smith (jsmith@...; (778) 772-3016) or Melissa Hadley (mjhadley@...; (250) 360-1492 ext. 224).

I hope you can spare a few minutes to give us your opinion.

Thanks,

Jeff.

Jeff Ardron

Vice-President PacMARA

Scientific Advisor on Marine Protected Areas

German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation

Marine and Coastal Nature Conservation Unit

Isle of Vilm, D-18581 Putbus, Rügen, Germany

tel:  +49 (0) 38 301 86 129

fax: +49 (0) 38 301 86 150

jeff.ardron@...

Hello PacMARA list serve,

I thought I would share with you a resolution of the EU Parliament that was passed yesterday. Hopefully this will inspire Canada and other nations..? For those of you who want MPAs, see § 95, for example.

Caveat: Remember that in Europe, EU democracy is more than a bit undemocratic, and that Parliament cannot put forward any new laws; i.e. it does not have “legislative initiative...” While this does give it some freedom to come up with very idealistic resolutions, like the one below, they are usually characterised by a disappointing powerlessness. Even so, I have never seen anything like this from any other parliament in the world... If you have, please share!

Correction: § 112 talks about low freq sonar, when actually it is mid-frequency sonar that is associated with possible problems with mammals such as the infamous mass strandings. (Needless to say, this is a controversial topic.)

All the best, and have a good weekend,

Jeff.

European Parliament resolution of 12 July 2007 on a future maritime policy for the European Union: a European vision for the oceans and seas

Full text at:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P6-TA-2007-0343&language=EN&ring=A6-2007-0235

Excerpts (there is lots more interesting stuff that I did not include)...

Sustainable maritime environment

89.  Recalls its resolution of 14 November 2006 on a Thematic Strategy on the Protection and Conservation of the Marine Environment(16) and reiterates, in particular, the need for:

90.  Recognises that a healthy marine environment constitutes the basis for sustainable development of the shipping sector in the EU and recalls the EU's commitment to incorporate the environmental dimension into all aspects of Community policy;

91.  Insists that a clean marine environment, with sufficient biodiversity to ensure the proper functioning of its component ecosystems, is essential for Europe; further insists that, because of the intrinsic value of maritime areas, the benefits of a good marine environmental status in the EU extend well beyond the potential economic gains to be made from exploiting the various components of the seas, coastal waters and river basins and that, therefore, the conservation and, in many cases, rehabilitation of the EU's marine environment is imperative;

92.  Recalls the principle underpinning the ecosystem approach to the management of human activities as one of the key elements of the Thematic Strategy on the Marine Environment; insists that this principle also be applied with regard to maritime policy;

93.  Stresses in the strongest possible terms that the criteria used to define good environmental status must be sufficiently far-reaching since these objectives, which pertain to quality, will probably constitute the benchmark for action programmes for a long time to come;

94.  Also considers that measures to improve water quality must be taken swiftly and is, therefore, concerned at the extended timetable proposed in the proposal for a directive on a marine strategy;

95.  Insists that the implementation of a network of marine protected areas be accelerated;

96.  Is convinced that a clean marine environment is critical for marine species, including both commercial fish and fish that are not commercially exploited, and that the replenishment of depleted fish stocks depends on a reduction in marine pollution as well as in fishing levels; considers that, in order to ensure that fishmeal used in the EU is not contaminated, it is imperative to reduce marine pollutants;

97.  Draws attention to the sometimes disastrous impact of exotic organisms in the marine ecosystem and recognises that invasive alien species are a significant threat to marine biodiversity; calls on the Commission to take urgent measures to prevent the transfer of organisms in ballast water and to introduce effective controls on the discharge of ballast water within EU waters;

98.  Considers that the concept of clustering could have a positive impact on the marine environment if habitat conservation, pollution control, and other environmental technologies are incorporated into the design and implementation of clusters from the planning stages onwards;

99.  Welcomes the recognition by the Commission that a comprehensive system of spatial planning is necessary in order to ensure a stable regulatory environment and a legally binding basis for decision making; considers that an essential criterion for effective ecosystem-based spatial planning must be to organise activities in such a way as to reduce the impact of environmentally damaging activities on ecologically sensitive areas while simultaneously using resources in all other areas in an ecologically sustainable manner; in this context insists on the use of the Strategic Environmental Assessment instrument under Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment(17) ; stresses that any system of marine spatial planning at EU level must add value to national systems and plans, where they exist, be based on the level of marine regions and sub-regions as proposed by the Marine Strategy Directive and be a tool to further the use of an ecosystem-based approach to marine management and the objectives of good environmental status under the Marine Strategy Directive;

100.  Notes that the achievement of a good environmental status also requires that human activities conducted outside ecologically sensitive areas be strictly regulated so as to minimise any possible negative impact on the marine environment;

Integrated fisheries policy

101.  Takes the view that fishing activity must contribute to the maintenance of viable coastal communities; stresses that, in order for this to be achieved, inshore, small-scale fishing interests and recreational anglers must be given access to fisheries, and that such fishing activities encourage tourism, protect our rich coastal heritage and help to keep our seaside communities together;

102.  Expresses its concern that, while the sector is ready to accept the development of an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, as a result of the additional restrictions that might result from the Natura 2000 network and other possible marine protected areas (MPAs), unrestricted access and the fisheries activities in these areas might be compromised; takes the view that the development of fisheries activities that do not harm the protection objectives should be allowed within MPAs; also takes the view that, in the case of fisheries activities that harm, or potentially harm, the protection objectives of MPAs, greater efforts should be made, including through research and development, to make fishing methods more environmentally-friendly in order to facilitate greater access to such areas wherever justifiable;

103.  Notes, however, that fishing will have to be restricted in the future through a precautionary approach ensuring the maintenance of healthy ecosystems and the protection of rare, vulnerable or valued species and habitats and that this will inevitably include an increased level of environmental protection than before, involving a network of MPAs created in accordance with the provisions laid down within the framework of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and a system of ICZM, so as to ensure that the needless degradation of habitats and sharp decline in biodiversity is stopped;

104.  Calls on the Commission to take due account of successful experiences in fisheries management by local and regional authorities so that they can be applied as models in other regions, particularly those experiences that involve integrated and sustainable management of the sea through a ban on non-selective fishing gear, matching the size of fishing fleets to available resources, coastal planning, regulating tourism activities, such as cetacean watching, drawing up management plans for sites in the Natura 2000 network and creating protected areas;

105.  Stresses that the valuable advisory role of Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) should be recognised and that RACs should be consulted on marine management;

106.  Endorses the commitment made by the EU at the Earth Summit in Johannesburg 2002, and reiterated in the recent Commission Communication entitled "Implementing sustainability in EU fisheries through maximum sustainable yield" (COM(2006)0360), to restore fish populations to levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015, where possible; is of the view that this is best done by avoiding the use of arbitrary reference points that are based on a simple mathematical model; considers that an alternative interpretation of MSY, using a concept such as maximising the cumulative catches over a fixed period of time (possibly a decade), could provide a realistic and possible way of improving the state of fisheries in the EU;

107.  Considers that one important way of reducing discards is to improve the selectivity of fishing, through modifications to fishing gear and techniques; recognises that the cooperation and knowledge of fishermen in this matter is essential and that fishermen who are innovative in this sense should be rewarded;

108.  Calls for increased efforts to end the disgraceful by-catch and discard problem which is a serious consequence of the Total Allowable Catches (TACs) and quotas regime of the CFP; takes the view that the by-catch depredation of marine mammals, seabirds and turtles is an abhorrence that must be stopped and that, in addition, the damage caused by fishing gear to sensitive seabeds and vulnerable deep water habitats, such as cold-water reefs, seamounts and sponge fields, requires that these be given special protection from fishing gear; points out that lost nets also lead to 'ghost-fishing' which can cause considerable fish-stock depletion and habitat damage;

109.  Believes strongly that there is an urgent need to promote and apply a mapping/spatial planning programme for Community waters in order to meet the need to maintain a sustainable and geographically representative fisheries sector; believes that the mapping out of zones is a suitable exercise as regards off-shore wind-farms or energy production, carbon sequestration and sand and gravel extraction or as regards aquaculture and that mapping the location of marine protected areas, including Natura 2000 sites and other sensitive habitats and species, would lead to a more efficient and sustainable use of the maritime environment; stresses that in order to enable effective spatial planning, areas of fishing activity need to be mapped, and this should be facilitated by improving and standardising access to vessel monitoring systems and logbook data across Member States; considers that planning decisions concerning Community waters should be taken in full consultation with the fisheries sector and the communities directly affected;

110.  Highlights the increasing socio-economic significance of fish farming as marine fish stocks diminish worldwide; believes that the worldwide annual sale of aquaculture products will soon exceed the sale of wild catch; stresses that the EU has been at the forefront of this exciting development and should strive to maintain its leading position and encourage further development in a way that is compatible with other coastal and maritime uses; stresses the importance of fish farming for often remote, rural communities where few other job opportunities exist; highlights that, within the context of an ICZM approach, clearly defined areas where fish farms may be clustered should be promoted and that this should be linked to a simplified regulatory regime encouraging entrepreneurship and sustainability; believes that new techniques should be developed in the aquaculture sector in order to enable improved management of quality, traceability assurance throughout the production and value-added chains and the overall recognition of fish farming as a key activity in the maritime sector;

111.  Draws attention to the fact that certain aquaculture practices are contributing to the depletion of some stocks; points out that catching juveniles of certain species in the sea for fattening prevents them from reproducing and ensuring the biological balance between species; takes the view that the high prices that some of these species reach in some world markets lie at the root of this complete disregard for the need to preserve certain marine ecosystems;

112.  Points out that military operations also impact on the fisheries sector; notes that marine firing ranges are 'no go' areas for fishing and other forms of shipping but that they can, however, offer havens for biodiversity; stresses, nevertheless, that the use of ultra low frequency sonar, particularly by submarines, has a serious effect on sea mammals and other fish stocks and should be strictly regulated and confined to zones;

113.  Stresses the need to monitor fishing in international waters, since this also affects fishery resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) within the EU.

137.  Is convinced that the precautionary principle, as embodied in Article 174(2) of the Treaty, must form the basis of all types of exploitation of the maritime zones of the EU; stresses that a lack of scientific certainty should therefore not be used as an excuse for delaying preventive action; believes, on the other hand, that haste as regards preventive action should not prevent the use of scientific information;

Jeff Ardron

Vice-President PacMARA

Scientific Advisor on Marine Protected Areas

German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation

Marine and Coastal Nature Conservation Unit

Isle of Vilm, D-18581 Putbus, Rügen, Germany

tel:  +49 (0) 38 301 86 129

fax: +49 (0) 38 301 86 150

jeff.ardron@...

Hi PacMARA list,

Completely off-topic, but a quirky tidbit I though you might enjoy... I tried it, and it is for real.

--Jeff.

Blackle - Environmentally friendly Google

ENGLISH VERSION

Whenever your PC screen is all white (as in a Word page for instance) the computer will consume about 74 watts. When black it uses an average of 59 watts. Using this knowledge, some months ago, Mark Ontkush wrote an article about how much could be economized if a Google page used a black background instead of white.

Taking into account the enormous popularity of the site, according to Mark's calculations, about 750 megawatts/hour would be economized each year.

Using this data Google created an all dark version of his search engine calling it Blackle that works exactly as the original version but consumes less power.

http://www.blackle.com/