Marine Protected Areas in Alaska: ADF&G’s Program Doug Woodby Alaska Department of Fish and Game Juneau, Alaska with help from Cori Cashen, Kristen Mabry,

Marine Protected Areas in Alaska:ADF&G’s Program

Doug WoodbyAlaska Department of Fish and Game

Juneau, Alaska

with help from Cori Cashen, Kristen Mabry, Janet Schempf, Ellen Fritts, Lance Trasky, Glenn Seaman, Carol Barnhill, Kerri Tonkin, Kimberly Phillips, and Tim

Haverland

Topics

Public demand and Industry Concern Public process for selection of Marine Protected Areas

– MPA Task Force Report to the Board of Fisheries

Implications/Applications Fishery management Ecosystem monitoring

Definitions

Marine Protected Area

“ Areas designated for special protection to enhance the management of marine resources” (NRC 2001)

with “year-round protection” (NOAA 2001)

Marine Reserve

“zones within an MPA where removal or disturbance of resources is prohibited” = “no-take” areas (NRC 2001)

Trawl and Special Groundfish Closures

Monashka Bay

Pinnacles

"L

"L

"L

"L

"L

"L

"L

"L

"L

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y

61° N

60° N

14

6° W

14

7° W

14

8° W

14

9° W

Hook Point

Wooded I. (Fish I.)

The Needle

Point Elrington

Glacier Island

Perry Island

Point Eleanor

Rocky Point

Bligh Island - North Tip

Bligh Island - South TipPorcupine Point

Knowles Head

Point WhitshedPoint Bentinck

Seal Rocks

Zaikof Point

60 10.96 N 147 20.12 W

60 29.96 N 147 20.12 W60 29.96 N 147 00.12 W

Cape Hinchinbrook

Point Freemantle

Johnstone Point

Year-round No Trawl Gear**5 AAC 39.165

No Pollock Trawl 6/1 - 11/15 AAC 28.250

"L Steller Sea Lion Haulout or Rookery

Trawl Restrictions in Prince William Sound

Notes: **Pollock trawl gear is allowed west of Johnstone Point, Knowles Head, and Bligh Island and north of Zaikof Point and Cape Hinchinbrook (depicted as blue lines on the map) during the directed pollock fishery.5 AAC 28.263 (b)

Non-pelagic trawl gear may not be used to fish for groundfish, except sablefish,inside PWS. 5 AAC 28.230.

10 0 10 20 Miles

Mon

tagu

e Isla

nd

Hinchinbrook Island

Northwestern Shrimp Trawl Fishing District

Orca Bay

Po r

t Wel

ls

50 0 50 100 Miles

1

2

3

5

4

6

8

4

4

7

1 Near-shore Bristol Bay2 Red King Crab Savings Area

3 Chum Savings Area4 Chinook Savings Area5 Bogoslof6 Pribilof Island Conservation Area7 C. opilio Bycatch Limitation Zone8 International Donut Hole

Bering Sea Fishery Closure Areas

Cape Edgecumbe (Sitka) Pinnacles

Closed to taking of all groundfish

Protects significant concentrations of lingcod

7.7 km2

State Game Refuges and Sanctuaries

#

PALMER HAY FLATS SGR GOOSE BAY SGR

YAKATAGA SGR

SUSITNA FLATS SGR

TRADING BAY SGR

ANCHORAGE COASTALWILDLIFE REFUGE

MENDENHALLWETLANDS SGR

IZEMBEK SGR

WALRUS ISLANDS SGS

State Game Refuge

State Game Sanctuary

CAPENEWENHAM

SGRSTAN PRICE SWS

#

MCNEIL RIVER SGS

State Critical Habitat Areas

HOMER AIRPORT CHA

PORT MOLLER CHA

PORT HEIDEN CHA

CINDER RIVER CHA

EGEGIK CHA

PILOT POINT CHA

KALGIN ISLAND CHA

FOX RIVER FLATS CHAKACHEMAK BAY CHA

CLAM GULCH CHA

ANCHOR RIVER/FRITZ CREEK

TUGIDAK ISLAND CHA

REDOUBT BAY CHA

COPPER RIVER DELTA CHA

Steller Sea Lion Critical Habitat

Areas defined by radius and season

Haulout SitesRookeriesSSL Critical Habitatlisted in ESA

Impetus for MPA Public Process

Public concern with fishery failures At least 25% of world’s fisheries are overfished Examples of recent Alaskan fishery failures:

– Dungeness crabs: Yakutat, PWS, Cook Inlet– Red king crab: Kodiak– Shrimp: PWS, Cook Inlet, Kodiak/Westward– Rockfish: local depletions

Historic Alaskan “fishery” failures– Bowhead whale– Steller’s sea cow

Impetus for MPA Public Process (2)

Executive Order 13158 (2000)– Directive to develop national system of MPAs

Public proposals to Board of Fisheries, 2001/02– Proposals 42 & 402 (incl. PWS), 424 for Marine Reserves

ADF&G staff interest in MPAs as fishery management tools Mitigation to meet provisions of Magnuson-Stevens Act

(1996)– Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

– Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC)

VS. Industry concern for further loss of fishing areas

Recommendations to the Board of Fisheries Focus on reserves in relation to fisheries

– Recommendation for process Goals and uses of MPAs in Alaska Enhanced public participation Site selection, size, and other design criteria Monitoring and evaluation of effectiveness

– Literature review of the scientific basis– Catalogue and GIS maps of areas– Review of legal process for designating MPAs – Review of programs in other jurisdictions: Federal U.S., BC, WA, OR, CA

ADF&G’s Role

ADF&G Task Force

Commercial Fisheries Division– Earl Krygier, Denby Lloyd, Kristin Mabry, Tory O’Connell, Charlie

Trowbridge, Doug Woodby (chair) Habitat Division

– Janet Hall-Schempf Sport Fish Division

– Scott Meyer Wildlife Conservation

– Bob Small Commissioner’s Office

– Rob Bosworth

Not a public body Recommendations out for review, ~ 2-3 months.

Goals for MPAs and Reserves

Habitat protection– e.g., corals

Conserve biodiversity

Improve fishery management– Bet hedging against risk– Reduce exploitation rate– Protect spawning and

nursery areas Provide baseline

environmental data

Conserving Biodiversity (Inside Reserves)

Reserves are effective for increasing:– Fish abundance: 2X (Halpern in press)– Average fish size– Species richness (usually)

These results are from mostly sedentary species in tropical reef systems

Results not surprising (in hindsight)– Exponential increase in fecundity with fish size

Reserves as Fishery Management Tools

Q: Does fishery yield increase outside reserves?– A major concern for industry

A: Depends on many factors, including dispersal of larvae, juveniles, and adults.– In theory, depends on assumptions (Hastings and Botsford

1999, Guénette et al. 2000)– Experimentally, hard to assess– In practice:

sometimes yes (Murawski et al. 2000, Roberts et al. 2001) sometimes no (Frank et al. 2000)

-73 -72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -6640

41

42

43

44

45

012345

DF_GP

-73 -72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -6640

41

42

43

44

45

40

41

42

43

44

45-73 -72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -66

Trawl Effort, ’91-’93

Courtesy of Paul Rago et al., NMFS, Woods Hole

Georges BankCod

Year

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Spa

wni

ng S

tock

Bio

mas

s ('0

00 m

t) &

Rec

ruitm

ent (

mill

ion

s, a

ge

1)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Exp

loita

tion

Rat

e

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Spawning Stock BiomassRecruitmentExploitation Rate

~50% Increase in SSBsince 1994

closure


Georges Bank Haddock

Year

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Sp

aw

nin

g S

tock

Bio

ma

ss (

'00

0 m

t) &

Re

cru

itme

nt (

mill

ion

s, a

ge

1)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Exp

loita

tion

Rat

e

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40


~400% Increase inSSB since 1994

closure


Georges Bank Yellowtail

Year

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Spa

wn

ing

Sto

ck B

iom

ass

('0

00

mt)

&R

ecr

uitm

en

t (m

illio

ns,

ag

e 1

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Exp

loita

tion

Rat

e

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0


~800% Increase in SSB since 1994

closure


~1600% increasesince 1994


Georges Bank Haddock Spawning Aggregations


Transport of Reproductive Products

Spawning(Eggs)

LarvaePelagic

Juveniles


Some Lessons from Georges Bank

All four species had been heavily exploited Greatest benefits for most sedentary species

mobility: Cod>Haddock>Flounder>Scallop

Placement of closed areas is important– Spawning areas– Juvenile rearing areas

“Source” areas as opposed to “Sinks”

Not a controlled experiment– Other restrictions contributed to increases in SSB

Fishing effort is still excessive

Alternative Lesson: Scotian Shelf

Juvenile haddock closed area, 1987 (Frank et al. 2000)

No effect on recruitment or survival– Previously over-exploited – hard to recover– Large-scale environmental changes (cooling)– Older fish not protected (outside closed area)– Not a complete closure – fixed gear allowed until 1993

Closed areas alone are not sufficient– Need additional control measures

Reserves as Controls

Purpose: to distinguish fishing or other human-induced effects from

environmental effects

Examples:– Glacier Bay – world’s largest temperate marine reserve

USGS, NPS, ADF&G cooperative research agreement– Sea urchin and sea cucumber fishery control areas – SE

Dive Fishery Closed Areas - SE Alaska

Sea cucumber closures for subsistence protection (14)

Sea lion rookeries (4) Research controls (4)

– sea urchins

– sea cucumbers

Sampling for density growth recruitment

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Haines

Juneau

Ketchikan

PetersburgSitka

Skagway

Wrangell

Closed AreaSea Lion AreaControl Area

Reserves as Controls

Needs: Review existing closures and available data

– Funding issue

Review the existing fisheries and needs for closures– Fisheries as experiments: most lack controls

Public support Careful experimental design

– Consider effect of displaced effort

ADF&G’s program– Recommending a public process

Significant public (stakeholder) process needed

– Not recommending specific closed areas– Opportunity to learn from mistakes elsewhere

Reserves are– No panacea for fisheries– Tools, useful in combination with other fishery

management measures– Important for ecosystem monitoring

Summary & Conclusions

Documents

Marine Protected Areas in Alaska: ADF&G’s Program Doug Woodby Alaska Department of Fish and Game Juneau, Alaska with help from Cori Cashen, Kristen Mabry,