Establishment of marine protected areas alone does not restore coral reef communities in Belize

Published source details Cox C., Valdivia A., McField M., Castillo K. & Bruno J.F. (2017) Establishment of marine protected areas alone does not restore coral reef communities in Belize. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 563, 65-79.
Share Tweet Email

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Enforce protected area restrictions and regulations Action Link
	Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified) Action Link
	Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit all types of fishing and collection Action Link

Enforce protected area restrictions and regulations

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2013 in 16 coral reef sites along the Belize Barrier Reef, Belize (Cox et al. 2017) found that sites with greater enforcement of fishing restrictions had similar coral cover compared to sites with lower or no enforcement. Coral cover was similar in areas where enforcement was considered good (21%), moderate (15%), inadequate (19%) or absent (20%). In addition, cover was similar across sites with different protection (fully protected: 20%, some fishing restrictions: 18%, no protection: 21%) and did not change due to time since protection started (see paper for details). Sixteen sites were selected (15−18 m depth) and classified based on the level of enforcement of restrictions. Enforcement was classified as good (regular patrols and satisfactory compliance), moderate (regular patrols but some poaching and insufficient legal outcomes), inadequate (irregular patrols, greater poaching, insufficient legal outcomes, and a high level of concern from the local community) or absent. Each site was monitored in May and June in 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 via six 10 m transects, spaced around 10 m apart. Coral cover was recorded, and corals were identified to species level.

(Summarised by: William Morgan)
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2013 in 16 coral reef sites along the Belize Barrier Reef, Belize (Cox et al. 2017) found that protected areas that prohibited some types of fishing had similar coral cover as unprotected areas and areas prohibiting all types of fishing. Coral cover was similar in areas with some fishing restrictions (18%), unprotected areas (21%) and fully protected areas (20%). In addition, cover was similar across different enforcement levels (good: 21%, moderate: 15%, inadequate: 19%, absent: 20%) and did not change due to time since protection started (see paper for details). Four sites were selected with some restrictions (limited fishing licenses and banned use of traps, nets and longlines), four with no protection (although fishing of herbivorous fish and Nassau groupers Epinephelus striatus was restricted at all sites), and four that were fully protected (only non-extractive activities allowed). Each site was monitored in May and June in 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 via six 10 m transects, spaced around 10 m apart. Coral cover was recorded, and corals were identified to species level.

(Summarised by: William Morgan)
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit all types of fishing and collection

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2013 in 16 coral reef sites along the Belize Barrier Reef, Belize (Cox et al. 2017) found that protected areas that prohibited all types of fishing and collection had similar coral cover as areas limiting some fishing activities and unprotected areas. Coral cover was similar in fully protected areas (20%), areas with some fishing restrictions (18%) and unprotected areas (21%). In addition, cover was similar across different enforcement levels (good: 21%, moderate: 15%, inadequate: 19%, absent: 20%) and did not change due to time since protection started (see paper for details). Sixteen sites were selected (15−18 m depth): four that were fully protected (only non-extractive activities allowed), four with some restrictions (limited fishing licenses and banned use of traps, nets and longlines), and four with no protection (although fishing of herbivorous fish and Nassau groupers Epinephelus striatus was restricted at all sites). Each site was monitored in May and June in 2009, 2010, 2012 and 2013 along six 10 m transects, spaced around 10 m apart. Coral cover was recorded, and corals were identified to species level.

(Summarised by: William Morgan)