Some years ago the city of Tela in Honduras was only known for its beaches. No one was aware that underwater additional national heritage could be found. The coral reefs of the Tela Bay are this other treasure.

The Tela Bay in Honduras has coral reefs, the conservation of which needs attention. Photographer and copyright (c) 2013 Erkki Siirila.

Francois Ligeard, The Chamber of Tourism of Tela, says: “The good news is that we can offer a new site for both the national and international tourist. We have to highlight the fact that this place is very beautiful. It has high cover of live coral. We notice that always when we dive on this reef. One easily gets emotional because every time we go the local reef we find something new and more beautiful.”

Dennis Sierra, The Prolansate Conservation Foundation, Tela, sees the “newly discovered” coral reefs in the following way: “The best news is that in Tela we have many people both in the civil society, local government and the business sector who are very interested in the conservation of the coral banks of the Tela Bay. The preservation needs have an acceptance at the community level. Also at the level of the central government there is a lot of interest in declaring a marine park in the Bay of Tela.”

Only fishing was done on the local Capiro Reef in the past. Nowadays, divers come here to see the angelfish and the many species of coral. For example, black coral is found here.

The coral bank of Capiro is the best known reef area in the Tela waters. Photo and copyright (c) 2013 Erkki Siirila.

Dennis Sierra: “Logically we look toward the future generations. We need to implement conservation actions in the Bay area, if we want to leave this ecosystem as a heritage to our children. Tela has been favored by God. We have to remember that the natural richness we have in Tela contributes in a positive way to tourism opportunities here. Tela has its future in the resources of that Bay.”

Francois Ligeard: “The biggest challenge we face is to take care of the reef both for our generation and the future generations. We need to get the fishermen and other local people involved to be able to preserve this reef. We have been working already by installing permanent mooring buoys. In this way, we need not anchor the boats and we can stop the damage that has been caused to the reef by anchors in the past.”

The mangroves of the Bay may not be forgotten as reef conservation is promoted. The mangroves produce nutrition for marine life. In addition, among the roots, many species of coral reef fish live during their juvenile stage. The mangroves also protect the coast from the waves of the sea.

The seagrass beds in the Tela waters have functions similar to those of the mangroves. In addition, many reef fish migrate to the seagrass areas in order to eat.

When forests are preserved, there is only little erosion on land and less mud enters the sea via the rivers. This is crucial in reef conservation as the corals need clean and clear water. Related to the above, it is also necessary to develop the treatment of sewage and waste waters.

In the Tela Bay there are very healthy coral colonies. It is important to take care of the reefs, because climate change threatens them, through the elevated sea-water temperatures and through the acidification of the sea.

Coral reefs will be more resistant to global environmental changes, when at the local level there is no overfishing and when the other pressures are kept at the minimum level. In this way, the coral reefs of Tela will produce economic and environmental benefits to us also in the future.

The following Youtube video was shot and produced by the Coastal Challenges’ Editor. It tells the above story of the Tela coral reefs in Spanish. The original is in high definition; this lower-resolution Youtube version can be best seen be adjusting the image resolution under the Youtube window to 480 p.

There were about 2,500 manatees in Florida 30 years ago. In 2013 the number is approximately 5,000. “We have learned to live together with these animals”, says Visitor Services Specialist Ivan Vicente from the Crystal River office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The conservation measures have lead to visible results in spite of the fact that boat propellers, fishings gear and toxic algal blooms (red tides) still threaten the population of the West Indian manatee, Trichechus manatus, in the U.S.

As manatees do not have any thick layer of blubber (unlike whales) under their skin, in autumn the U.S. manatee population migrates to the warm water areas of Florida. All the animals spend in the State the months between November and March. In spring and summer, some manatees migrate to other states while others stay in Florida most or all of the year.

A Florida manatee leaving the strictly protected zone in the Three Sisters’ Springs protected area. Photo from Crystal River, copyright (c) 2013 Erkki Siirila.

Of the 2,800 manatees on the West Coast of Florida during wintertime, about 550 stay in the Crystal River wetlands. The reason is the underwater springs, the water temperature of which is higher than that of the sea and rivers in winter. Another 2200 manatees stay on the East Coast of Florida during the coldest months. The Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico populations never mix in spite of the fact that together they are considered the Florida manatee, a subspecies (Trichechus manatus latirostris) of the West Indian manatee.

Even in winter, the manatees sometimes leave their favorite warm-water spots. They do this in order to feed on sea grass, which does not grow in fresh water. Processing sea grass results in a lot of gas in the digestive system. This is one reason why the manatees look so fat.

On the West Coast of Florida, manatees have become an important attraction for nature tourism. In the Crystal River area, 34 companies have a license to arrange paddling or snorkeling tours to the protected areas. The number of customers per year is around 150,000. Numerous boats of the tour companies can be observed in the most popular destination Three Sisters’ Springs from early morning to late afternoon. Most of the time there are 20-50 snorkelers in the water. An approaching manatee may be touched, but disturbing a sleeping manatee may result in a fine. Boaters are fined when they do not respect the manatee-related speed restrictions while navigating the rivers and canals. Still, accidents do happen and it is common to see propeller cuts on the backs of manatees.

Outside the Crystal River wetland parks, many of the  Florida manatees spend the winter months in the warm-water discharge spots of power plants. As some of the State´s power plants will be shut down in the near future, there are plans to continue discharging warm water into the wetland areas where the manatees are used to spending the coldest months. If this is not done, manatee deaths from exposure to cold water could be expected. There is a problem even in the natural wintering areas: the growing human population of Florida consumes so much groundwater that the freshwater outflow in the “manatee” springs is adversely affected.

A manatee resting in a freshwater spring in the Crystal River wetlands. Photo copyright (c) 2013 Erkki Siirila.

An additional challenge for the Florida manatees is that genetically they are not well-equipped for future challenges. Their genetic heritage is narrow and diversity low, because the whole population has its origin in just a few West Indian manatees which swam to Florida from the Caribbean. In spite of the threats, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expects the endangered U.S. manatee population to double another time during the next 20 years. In 2033 there would be 10,000 individuals of these aquatic mammals in the U.S. waters if everything goes well.

The three species of manatees and their relative the dugong are a specific coastal management challenge in the tropical and temperate waters of our planet. When the populations of these friendly animals are well managed, they have a high potential of becoming a major attraction for nature-oriented tourism.

In popular diving areas like the Red Sea, sunken ships can take diving pressure away from the heavily used coral reefs. This is the story of five recently located wrecks in Egypt. They do not only relieve the pressure caused by divers on the reefs, they are even in the process of becoming reefs by themselves. Fish and coral have started to colonise the remaining ship structures already.

Four of the new dive sites are 100-250 kilometres north of Hurghada in the Gulf of Suez, one is just a day trip from the city shores. Recently innovative dive guides and underwater photographers like Kimmo Hagman, a Finn based in Hurghada, have initiated week-long live-aboard expeditions to these little-known sunken ships.

The northernmost of the “new” wrecks is SS Turkia (part of the propeller pictured above). The construction of this British ship was completed in Hull, U.K., in 1910. The 91-meter long vessel sank on its keel after a fire and explosions onboard. Everything was not destroyed, and there is a lot to explore, as the image (below) demonstrates.

The disaster took place off Zafarana in 1941. The reasons for the events (air attack or an “ordinary” explosion of hazardous cargo of military material) are not clear. On this wreck the dive depths vary between 15 and 24 metres.

Another little-known wreck, which is extremely interesting to explore, is SS Scalaria (image above), a Shell oil tanker from Britain. The vessel was launched in Newcastle, U.K., in 1921. While being anchored in the Ras Gharib oil production area, close to the western shores of the Gulf of Suez, the ship was attacked by German war planes and destroyed by powerful explosions in 1942. 11 men lost their lives.

Of the main hull structures of this 125-metre long vessel, only the bow (photo above)  and stern can be identified by divers. The ship sits on its keel and most of the dive will be spent at only 10 to 12 metres.

The third big and rarely visited wreck in the Gulf of Suez is the Egyptian cargo vessel MV Aboudy (image above). The 76-metre long ship was constructed in Ville de Tenes in the Netherlands and  launched in 1959 or 1960. Aboudy met its destiny during a storm in 1988. The disaster occurred in the shallow waters of Ras Gharib.  The hull of the vessel, which lies on its port side, is in a good condition. Aboudy is an enjoyable dive: the maximum depth is 12 metres and visibility about 25 metres.

MS Bakr is an easily dived small wreck (foredeck visible above) close to surface in the Ras Gharib area. The vessel was built in Kiev, Ukraine, in 1964, when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union. Before sinking in an attack by Israeli fighter planes in the Yom Kippur war in 1973, Bakr functioned as a survey vessel in the Egyptian oil exploration. The hull is still quite intact in spite of the missile attack.  The maximum depth is 10 metres. You can explore the whole ship during one visit, as it is only 49 metres long. Visibility  is 10 to 15 metres.

The fifth virgin dive site, which takes dive pressure away from the heavily visited “old reefs”, is MS Hebat Allah (photo above), built in Ingrandes, France in 1985. This 44.5-metre wreck is a small cargo ship which was damaged during a storm and intentionally sunk in order to make it Egypt´s first artificial reef for scuba divers in 2004. Accidentally the ship went down into deeper water than planned and never became everyman´s dive site. Now Hebat Allah can be found sitting upright on sand in the marine area between Small Giftun Island, Gota Abu Ramada and Hurghada City. The bottom depth is 46 metres, and 40-metre visiblity is common (see the second image below).

More information on the new Egyptian wreck attractions can be found on the web sites mentioned below. In addition to several dives on the sunken ships, these internet addresses were used as information sources for this article:

http://www.aquatours.com/

http://www.shipwrecksofegypt.com/

http://www.deeplens.com/

http://www.facebook.com/KimmoHagman.Photographer

The document states that for sound development in general, holistic, integrated and sustainable management of natural resources needs to be promoted. At the same time, economic, social and human development should be supported.  Also, the international community is asked to move the sustainable development agenda forward, through the achievement of internationally agreed goals including the existing Millennium Development Goals. Green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication is mentioned as one of the important tools available for achieving sustainable development.

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development was held in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012. The achievements of the meeting were minor. Only in the “seas and oceans” action area important progress was achieved. Aerial photo of Rio (c) 2012 copyright Erkki Siirila.

The Rio participants recognise the key role that improving energy efficiency plays. This includes the increasing share of renewable energy and cleaner, more energy-efficient technologies. Climate change as a persistent crisis is acknowledged: the global nature of climate change calls for the widest possible cooperation by all countries and their participation in an effective international response. Naturally, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is needed. Also the related urgent needs of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are mentioned in the final document.

The need for effective, transparent, accountable and democratic natural resources´ management institutions is mentioned in the document. So is the need for contributions towards sustainable development by both the public/private sectors and the scientific/technological communities. We are also reminded of the important role of citizens at the grass-root level, e.g. fishers, in the development of production activities which are environmentally more sound. The valuable contributions by  NGOs in promoting sustainable development are acknowledged.

The establishment of UNEP as a permanent UN organisation (instead of being a non-permanent programme) was not achieved, but it was decided that UNEP would be strengthened. In addition, the participants decided to establish an intergovernmental high-level political forum replacing the current UN Commission on Sustainable Development.

In the final document, the participating states recognise the severity of global biodiversity loss and degradation of ecosystems: this underlines the importance of biodiversity conservation, enhancing habitat connectivity and building ecosystem resilience.

In the Oceans and Seas chapter of The Future We Want, important progress can be observed. To begin with, the participating states commit to protect and restore the health, productivity and resilience of oceans and marine ecosystems, and to maintain their biodiversity for the conservation / sustainable use by the present and future generations. Furthermore, the participants agree to apply an ecosystem approach and the precautionary principle in marine management.

The Rio conference delegations recognise the importance of UNCLOS (Law of the Sea) in advancing sustainable development and they emphasise the need for cooperation in marine scientific research. The states also support the Regular Process for Global Reporting and Assessment of the State of the Marine Environment (established under the UN General Assembly) and look forward to the completion of its first global integrated assessment by 2014.

In Rio de Janeiro, the participating states supported the Regular Process for Global Reporting and Assessment of the State of the Marine Environment. The states look forward to the completion of the first global integrated assessment by 2014. The marine image was taken off Callao, Peru, photo copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

In the seas and oceans chapter, the importance of the conservation / sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction is recognised. Building on the work of an international working group (and before the end of the 69th Session of the United Nations General Assembly) the Rio participants commit to address this issue on an urgent basis.

The states also note with concern that the health of the oceans and marine biodiversity are negatively affected by marine pollution. The final document mentions marine debris, plastic, persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, and nitrogen-based compounds. The sources mentioned include marine and land-based sources, including shipping and land runoff. The participants commit to take action to reduce the incidence and impacts of such pollution on marine ecosystems. The relevant measures would include implementation of IMO conventions and the follow-up of relevant initiatives such as the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities. With the help of scientific assessments, the states further commit to take action to significantly reduce marine debris by 2025.

In the seas and oceans chapter the participants note the significant threat which alien invasive species pose to marine ecosystems, and commit to implement measures to prevent their introduction. The management of the adverse environmental impacts will be improved including those alien species adopted in the framework of IMO.

Sea level rise and coastal erosion are noted as serious threats for many coastal regions and islands particularly in developing countries. International action to address these challenges is called for in the final document.

The participating states also call for support to initiatives that address ocean acidification and the impacts of climate change on marine and coastal ecosystems and resources. They reiterate the need to work collectively to prevent further ocean acidification, as well as to enhance the resilience of marine ecosystems and of the communities whose livelihoods depend on them. The importance of marine scientific research, monitoring and observation of ocean acidification and of particularly vulnerable ecosystems through international cooperation are mentioned.

In the Rio final document the participating states stress their concern about the potential environmental impacts of ocean fertilization. They recall the decisions related to ocean fertilization adopted by the relevant intergovernmental bodies, and decide to continue addressing ocean fertilization with utmost caution. The precautionary approach will be applied.

In Rio the participating states promised to intensify the efforts to meet the 2015 target as to maintenance or restoring fisheries stocks to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield on an urgent basis. The photo of the fishing vessel is from the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas), copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

The Rio participants commit, on an urgent basis, to intensify the efforts to meet the 2015 target as to maintenance or restoring fisheries stocks to levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield. The foreseen time frame is “the shortest time feasible”. To achieve this, the states commit to urgently develop and implement science-based management plans. Fisheries reduction and suspension are listed as management methods. The importance of by-catch reduction and the control of destructive fishing practices are mentioned as well as the importance of impact assessments.

Relating to UNCLOS, the Rio delegations urge states to fully implement the 1995 Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. Furthermore, all States are called upon to implement the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and the corresponding FAO International Plans of Action and technical guidelines.

The final document acknowledges that illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing deprives many countries of a crucial natural resource and remains a persistent threat to their sustainable development. A recommitment to eliminate IUU fishing is presented. Reference is made to the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation which aims at preventing and combating these practices in the following ways: a) by implementing national and regional action plans in accordance with FAO’s international IUU combat plan, b) by identifying vessels engaged in IUU fishing, c) by depriving offenders of the benefits accruing from IUU fishing, and d) by cooperating with developing countries to systematically identify needs and build capacity (monitoring, control, surveillance, compliance and enforcement systems).

The Rio delegations recognise the need for transparency and accountability in fisheries management by regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs). The efforts already made by those RFMOs that have undertaken independent performance reviews are recognised. A call is presented on all RFMOs to regularly undertake such reviews, publish the results and implement the recommendations.

Furthermore, the Rio final document reaffirms the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation as to elimination of subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing and overcapacity, mentioning the importance of this sector to developing countries. Reference is made to the WTO Doha Development Agenda and the Hong Kong Ministerial mandates for more vigorous control of fisheries subsidies. Prohibition of subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and over-fishing is mentioned as a control measure. States are also encouraged to eliminate subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and over-fishing, to refrain from introducing new such subsidies and to refrain from extending or enhancing existing subsidies.

A commitment to ensure access to fisheries and corresponding markets by fishers (subsistence, small-scale, artisanal) and women fish workers and indigenous peoples is also presented, highlighting the needs of these communities in developing countries and small island developing states.

The importance of coral reef conservation and marine protected areas is highlighted in the final document of the Rio conference on sustainable development. Image from a Red Sea coral reef in Egypt, photo copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

As to coral reefs and mangroves, the Rio delegations recognise the significant economic, social and environmental contributions of coral reefs, in particular to islands and other coastal states, as well as the significant vulnerability of the reefs and mangroves to impacts including from climate change, ocean acidification, overfishing, destructive fishing practices and pollution. Support for international cooperation is expressed in order to conserve coral reef and mangrove ecosystems and to realise their social, economic and environmental benefits. Facilitation of technical collaboration and voluntary information sharing are mentioned as supporting measures. Surprisingly, sea grass beds are not separately mentioned in the Rio final document. (The importance of healthy sea grass beds as carbon sinks in fighting global climate change has recently been acknowledged by the marine science research community).

In the seas and oceans chapter of The Future We Want, the delegations reaffirm the importance of area-based conservation measures, including marine protected areas, consistent with international law and based on best available scientific information. The participants note decision X/2 of the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, that by 2020, 10 percent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are to be conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures.

Finally, it may be considered surprising that the importance of managing the sea-land interface as a special area was not mentioned in The Future We Want. As the coastal zone is an area of many opportunities, user conflicts, resource degradation and lost opportunities, it would have been natural to say something in the Rio final document about the need for integrated coastal zone management.

“The development challenges facing humanity are most complex in the coastal regions. Why? Partly because the richness and diversity of the coastal resources’ opportunities to support economic and social development are much greater than in the terrestrial environment or the purely marine environment. It is that interface between the sea and the land where we find the most complex, the most rich and the most diverse forms of natural resources. And they sustain many different forms of economic development. And that means that there is much competition for access to and often exclusive use of the coastal area and coastal resources. Now, the challenge we face as managers is trying to maximise the potential use of these resources without damaging the very resource base which creates those resources in the first place.”

Dr. Burbridge being interviewed on integrated coastal management in Helsinki. Photography and copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

“You need integration in the sense that there are different economic and social groups wanting to have access to the coast. And what you have to do is to try to treat them equitably, so that everybody has an equal chance of access to the resource but without damaging the resource for other people to enjoy and use in effective ways.  And that means that you have to get the different economic sectors to try to coordinate their activities so that they don´t disrupt the potential flow of benefits from the coast – without destroying the natural systems. And that’s the challenge. And that’s why we talk about integration. It is integration of different economic sectors, different social demands from the coast and different political systems trying to coordinate the development process more effectively.  We are talking about development planning here. We are not talking about environmental conservation. The environmental conservation is one tool to manage the natural systems.”

“Integrated coastal management is a set of principles to guide development planning. It is meant to create a working environment where people see that there are ways of doing things that are less environmentally damaging and more economically responsible, and create a greater social benefit. And that’s difficult, to get people to think of the environment, the economy and social aspects in the same sentence. And that’s what coastal management is trying to do. We are not purely trying to protect the environment, we are not trying to maximise the economic activities at the cost of social equity.”

Coastal zone activities in Helsinki, Finland, in April 2012. Photo copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

“One of the problems we have is getting any political system to understand how complex the coastal resource pressures are, but also the great value of the coast, the strategic value of the coast in meeting social and economic pressures. And those pressures have to be managed. And the economic rationale behind that is that you can get greater social and  economic benefits by wise management than you can by totally unregulated free-for-all development. And that’s the challenge, this convincing people that the strategic value of the coast is important enough to invest in managing the coast effectively.”

The interview (“Dr. Peter Burbridge and Integrated Coastal Zone Management” on Youtube) addresses more coastal management topics than those mentioned above. Here is the direct Youtube link:

An offshore reef near Tela, Honduras. Photographer and copyright (c) 2012 Erkki Siirila.

Nevertheless, all the evaluation results were not positive. Mr. Bustamante says: “It could also be observed that the number of herbivorous and commercial fishes had reduced. Their biomass had gone down.”

As regards the threats, two main threats were identified in the study. One was the loss of forest cover. The other one was the lack of wastewater treatment. The Tela wastewaters flow directly into the sea and coral reefs. In addition to soil, the runoff contains many chemicals including fertilizers. The nutrients in the runoff may facilitate algal growth on the reefs as, at the same time, the levels of herbivorous fishes consuming the algae are lower than normal. Overfishing is an additional threat which needs to be controlled in Tela.

In any case Tela is a good and encouraging example in a world where the coral reefs are threatened by high fishing pressure, global climate change and other side effects of the growth of human societies. Off Tela, fairly healthy coral reefs can still be found and new awareness is creating motivation to protect the reefs.

Mr. Marcello Dicunta Servellón, who operates a dive centre in Tela, is satisfied: “Healthy coral reefs represents incredible opportunities. One of the most obvious ones is recreational diving. A well-managed dive industry on healthy reefs can result in high economic growth for the community.”

A Spanish-speaking documentary (Corales para amar – Tela protege sus arrecifes) with the above-mentioned content can be watched on Youtube:

Lately, shark conservation has been slowly advancing, as the value of sharks, approximately 400 species in total, has been understood. Finally, real steps to save the remaining sharks are being taken. Especially the cruel fishing of sharks for fins only, up to 73 million sharks annually, had resulted in a lot of bad publicity. This negative publicity together with pressure from environmental groups made governments and inter-governmental bodies speed up shark conservation measures. Now there is new hope for the sharks worldwide.

As the global species conservation agreement CITES only prohibits the international trade (not fishing) of three shark species, i.e. the white, whale and basking shark, there has been much need for more efficient protection measures. For example Shark Conservation Trust has done a lot of lobbying lately to improve the management measures at the national and international levels. The Trust is a cooperation body of more than one hundred conservation organisations.

Finally there is new hope for the declining shark populations. The image is from Namibia, photographer and copyright (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

The recent advances include the following:

Palau, Honduras, Colombia, Mexico, the Maldives, the Marshall Islands, the Bahamas, and the Federated States of Micronesia signed during the UN General Assembly in September 2011 a declaration in which they promise to establish shark conservation areas in their national waters.

In China and Taiwan, where shark fin soup is a highly regarded speciality of the local kitchen, progress also took place. In September a campaign against shark finning started in China. It features Yao Ming, a local basked ball hero, and Richard Branson, a British millionaire. As to Taiwan, towards the end of 2011, the country passed a law which will end shark fishing for fins only at the beginning of January 2012.

In the U.S., the legislative loop holes in the management of shark fisheries were eliminated in 2011. This followed the example given by Australia, where the legislation had been tightened earlier. The Australian observation has been that when the law forces the fisherman to bring to port the entire shark with the fins attached, the interest in shark finning nearly disappears.

Positive news have been heard also from the European Union countries. On 21 November, the European Commission proposed to prohibit, with no exemptions, the practice of shark finning aboard fishing vessels. Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki said: “I very much look forward to the Council and the European Parliament accepting our proposal, so that it becomes law as soon as possible.” The proposal strengthens the existing EU legislation banning shark finning: member states will not be able to issue special fishing permits, which earlier have made the continuation of shark finning possible.

Global climate change is the main reason for the dramatic changes. The powerful adverse effects were shown in the Eastern Caribbean already in 2005, when the health of the region’s reefs weakened and live cover dropped during an extensive coral bleaching.

The study by Buddemeier et al. tells that it is already too late to stop the reef death. The big changes in the coral reef environment will take place even if substantial emission cuts of greenhouse gases are implemented in the coming years.

Coral reefs of the Caribbean are facing difficult times: efficient conservation measures are needed urgently. In addition to global emission cuts of greenhouse gases, innovative local conservation actions would be important. Photo copyright (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

The study published in the journal Climate Change in 2011 focuses on Eastern Caribbean reef health and especially the Virgin Islands’ area. The COMBO (COral Mortality and Bleaching Output) model was used for the predictions. Three realistic emission scenarios for greenhouse gases were the basis for the simulation.

The results indicate that future bleaching episodes will be followed by the reduction of live coral cover on the reefs. (Most of the damage will be caused by the warming of sea waters and related bleaching. The decline in reef condition will take place even if the adverse effect of ocean acidification is calculated as minor.)

If there is no adaptation by the corals to the elevated mean water temperatures, the live coral cover on the West Indies’ reefs will decrease to less than 5% already by the year 2035. In a scenario where corals develop an additional 1–1.5 degrees Celcius of heat tolerance (through a shift in the symbiotic algae that live in the coral tissues) coral cover above 5% could last until 2065.

The researchers did not include reefs which are located more than 30m underwater. Live coral cover between 5 and 10% was considered a limit where the reef would not be able to regenerate itself and could not be called a real coral reef any more. For several of these modeling scenarios, the researchers used starting levels of coral cover of 7%, 15%, and/or 30%. These values are realistic values in the Eastern Caribbean.

Buddemeier et al. summarise their study by saying that “coral reef communities are likely to be essentially gone from substantial parts of the Southeast Caribbean by the year 2035, given the current low cover values following the 2005 event” and that “the conversion of coral reefs to fundamentally different systems will have large implications for the provision of ecosystem services”. The authors add: “Given the modeling results presented here, urgent efforts are needed to identify and protect what appear to be the most resilient coral reefs in the Caribbean.”

The whole study (R. W. Buddemeier, Diana R. Lane and J. A. Martinich, Modeling regional coral reef responses to global warming and changes in ocean chemistry: Caribbean case study, Climatic Change, 2011, DOI: 10.1007/s10584-011-0022-z) can be found here: Study by Buddemeier et al.

In the Caribbean the lack of wastewater treatment is a common problem. This colony of elkhorn coral looks healthy in spite of the fact that raw sewage enters the sea 100m from the reef. Photo taken in Utila, Honduras, copyright (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

In 2003 there was an outbreak of this coral disease called acroporid serratiosis (APS). During the episode, the corallivorous snail Coralliophila abbreviata and stony coral Sideastrea siderea were noticed to be play a role in the development of the disease. Now, in aquaria experiments, wastewater has been demonstrated to be a definitive, direct source of the disease, while C. abbreviata and S. siderea are known to act as vectors and reservoirs, which may also to contribute to the infection of A. palmata.

The research results by K.R.Sutherland et al. published in 2011 demonstrate for the first time that a human pathogen can be passed from us humans to marine invertebrates and infect them. The authors of the study “Human Pathogen Shown to Cause Disease in the Threatened Eklhorn Coral Acropora palmata” say that “these findings underscore the interaction between public health practices and environmental health indices such as coral reef survival”.

A direct link to the article is here:  Elkhorn and sewage

The Coastal Challenges editor did a consultancy in the Fourth Region (Coquimbo Region) of Chile a few years ago. One of the results was a set of general guidelines for integrated coastal management in that region. In the ten conclusions/recommendations the local experiences were combined with the lessons learned in coastal management internationally.

A powerful tsunami in 2010 made Chileans aware of the need for sound coastal management. This Chilean government fax indicating there was a tsunami risk was not enough to result in massive coastal evacuations. As a result, lots of human lives were lost.

The conclusions and recommendations for integrated management of the Coquimbo coastal area are listed below:

1. Integrated management of the coastal zone is a learning process with incremental implementation, feedback and adjustment mechanisms.
2. At all levels of action, it is important to build the integrated management on a sustainable  financial and economic base, for example through self-funding.
3. It is important to incorporate in the process the opinions of all the involved and interested parties, for example by applying conflict resolution mechanisms.
4. It is essential that the actions keep focus on just a few issues which are understood by all the participants in the process. The focus on the issues means that an exact definition of the coastal zone is not a precondition for the action to begin.
5. In general, construction on the local institutional roots is the safest option. E.g. the existing management systems, which are politically supported, can be modified instead of building totally new management institutions. Also in this case, the application of innovative ideas for real integration is important.
6. A long-term vision is essential, and as part of this, opportunities should be left open for the future generations.
7. The management should be based on good knowledge of the laws of nature. Implementation would need to be proactive instead of retroactive.
8. It is important that the decision-making system is just and efficient.
9. It is essential to understand that combining sustainable management with the poverty of resource users is difficult. Because of this, development of economic alternatives for the least favoured groups is needed.
10. In sustainable coastal zone management, integration mechanisms are only one element. Specific action is needed also in the management of key species and habitats, pollution control, land use planning and environmental impact assessment. In addition to integration, sectoral activities in these and other action fields need to continue. (Naturally, sector-specific work needs to go on, but the sectoral actions should no more be implemented in isolation from other coastal zone activities.)

The ICZM process: legal issues

Legislation has an impact on all of the phases of an ICZM initiative, from information collection to policy implementation. Law has the potential to facilitate the process of ICZM, but it also has the capacity to limit or impede it. A diversity of legal systems exists, but analysis reveals a similarity of legal problems in the countries. Although ICZM is a modern development, it must inevitably function within a complex legal framework, most of which pre-dates the concept of ICZM and was created for different purposes.

The coast has traditionally been regarded as a jurisdictional boundary between land-based  laws and marine laws, and has rarely been recognised as an integral zone of legal competence. – There is no common practice on the definition of the coastal zone, although restricted concepts of the seashore have arisen within the legal system of some states (in the context of land ownership), by reference to selective tidal criteria. These criteria are too restrictive for ICZM.

There is no common practice on the definition of the coastal zone, although restricted concepts of the seashore have arisen within the legal system of some states. Photo from Panama, (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

It is probably not desirable to have an exclusive legal definition of the coastal zone for general purposes, but preferable to include all areas where land and sea exert mutual influence. However, specific boundaries need to be defined at the stage when management is applied to particular places. These boundaries should be flexible enough to embrace the dynamic nature of the coast. In particular, the boundaries should not subdivide natural areas that ought to be managed as a whole.

The coastal zones of most coastal states are governed by a complex framework of laws, which are usually sectoral, uncoordinated and unsuited for ICZM. Sectoral laws may unintentionally work against the objectives of ICZM. Sectoral laws may also be inadequate in that they may not cover both the land and sea components of the coastal zone.

In order to promote integrated management, there is a need for a thorough review of these laws, to identify overlaps, lacunae, and inconsistencies, at each level of administration and between levels. As far as possible, these inadequacies should be corrected to harmonise the legislation relevant to the coastal zone, even if consolidation is not possible.

If the parameters of each government agency´s responsibility are not clearly defined, conflicts may arise due to “vertical overlap” and “horizontal overlap”. – Relevant sectoral legislation should be amended or replaced by provisions that explicitly define the responsibilities of each authority, and explain the relationship between them.

Where coastal land is privately owned, the legal rights of individual landowners may conflict with the public needs of management. Another type of concern is caused by the fact that the market system is inefficient or inequitable in allocating the coastal zone benefits (recreational, socio-cultural, etc.) among users, with overexploitation and degradation as the result. This implies a need for government leadership in defining public and private rights and obligations. – Public rights of access to near-shore waters have often been the first purely coastal issues governed by specific coastal legislation. In offshore areas, rights are affected by principles of international law.

The Lysekil coast in Sweden is an area where the public demand for marine-related recreation is high. Photo (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

In many countries, the shorefront is public or state property, but inland from this point most land is privately owned. In contrast, the sea is usually in the public domain as far as the limit of territorial waters (up to a maximum of 12 miles). Beyond the territorial limit, states have rights of exploitation rather than ownership in their continental shelf or exclusive economic zone (200 miles).

Where law has traditionally given unsustainable rights to private landowners, the public acquisition of coastal land by negotiation or compulsary purchase provides the opportunity to manage it. Acquisition is an important method of safeguarding sensitive sites, however it is only feasible if corresponding funds are available; it is also not politically feasible everywhere. – Military ownership of land is particularly problematic, due both to strict access limitations and to confidentiality of activities on the property. These issues make it difficult to even assess the impact that the activities are having.

As an alternative approach to better management of private coastal lands, public authorities may be able to enter into contractual agreements with private landowners who accept restrictions or undertake positive measures on their own land in return for compensation.

In some countries, e.g. Finland,  “everyman´s right” entitles the public to go where they like on land and water in the countryside, including shore zones, provided they behave responsibly. Everyman´s rights should be well thought out, in order to avoid additional conflicts among resource users.

- – - – -

Lessons from the European Commission Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), ISBN 92-828-6471-5, can be downloaded from here: EU report. The reproduction of the publication is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

The ICZM process: collaboration issues

In coastal management, two types of collaboration can be distinguished. They are cooperation and participation. One of the key objectives of cooperation, which is involvement and collaboration of administrative partners, is coordination of policy. Mechanisms to achieve cooperation may include consultation and joint working groups. In participation, which means involvement and collaboration of a wide range of partners, e.g. NGOs, citizens and the private sector, the mechanisms include steering groups, technical panels and newsletters.

Collaboration should not be left to chance. Nor should it be considered without cost. In fact, cooperation and participation (together with information collection) are two of the most expensive and time-consuming elements of an ICZM initiative. Commonly there is even a need for a collaboration strategy in a coastal management initiative.

Technical jargon needs to be avoided and a common language found when government professionals and artesanal fishermen meet at a coastal management consultation. Photo from Saint Lucia, (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

Failing to correctly identify all of the relevant stakeholders can defeat the collaboration attempts. A stakeholder analysis should identify the relevant organisations and individuals. The involvement of these actors should then be ensured. Recruiting stakeholders as partners, for example through a steering group, is also a common mechanism for ensuring involvement and generating funding.

It may take a considerable amount of time to bring all of the stakeholders on  board. However, this process of involving all stakeholders and maintaining their involvement is itself part of the integrated management process, a part which is essential to ensuring the success of the whole ICZM venture. – A periodic reassessment of the relevant stakeholders is often needed. It is important not to forget future generations and others who are not physically present.

Effective communication should be remembered in order to prevent misunderstandings, conflicts, frustration, uncertainty, delays, extra costs, confusions over responsibilities, difficulties in respecting the common goals and activities, and also to prevent a poor project image. Good communication from the beginning is important, as early mistakes in communication may be especially difficult to remedy. – Effective communication is a two-way process. A “common language” should be developed, as understanding can be hindered by the use of technical jargon.

The impact that higher level plans can have on the coastal zone implies that an ICZM initiative will fail without the involvement and commitment of middle and upper level authorities. A particularly important obstacle to ICZM occurs when unexpected decisions are determined sectorally by national or regional agencies without local involvement. – Mechanisms are needed to ensure vertical communication and cooperation in policy development, as well as to ensure that the local individuals and organisations have a voice in any higher level decisions that will have significant impact on them. In addition to vertical cooperation, horizontal cooperation between neighbouring authorities is a logical component of ICZM initatives.

Cooperation across the land-sea boundary is a central consideration in coastal management initiatives, as the lack of this cooperation is a key problem in the coastal zone. Improvements can be achieved only by ensuring that authorities and economic actors active in both domains are involved in the process. Generally a better understanding of the nature of the interactions and interdependencies between the land and sea components of the coastal zone is needed. The marine issues need to be adequately linked to land-based planning and management activities.

Sectoral pressures and conflicts are widespread in coastal zones and commonly one sector may see the others as a threat to its own objectives. These conflicts and the need to resolve them are often the trigger for ICZM initiatives. Nevertheless, intra-sectoral conflicts can often be as damaging as inter-sectoral conflicts. – Specific conflict resolution techniques do exist. They can offer crucial help in finding compromises and widely accepted solutions in conflict situations.

Sectoral activities are commonly governed by sectoral laws, implemented by sectoral branches of administration. In view of the significant number of perceived conflicts between sectoral interests, it is essential for the relevant branches of administration to work together to find common ICZM solutions. Development of mechanisms to facilitate cooperation may be a gradual process that needs to break down traditional barriers and may even need changes in legal competencies. – Convincing the public of the long-term interest in finding common solutions may lead to pressure on sectoral administrations to work together.

Cooperation across the land-sea boundary is important in coastal management initiatives. Photo from Porkkala, Finland, (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

Public participation is particularly important to ensure that an ICZM initiative addresses issues related to quality of life, cultural and social heritage, and leisure time pursuits. Public involvement also helps ensure the implementability of any recommendations or plans. NGOs and civic organisations can play an important role by defending specific aspects of the societal good.

In ICZM initiatives it is also important to involve the private sector and stimulate private-public partnerships. Active private sector partners can often bring financial resources for the implementation phase. Involvement of financial institutions may be particularly important.

Commonly, lack of sufficient resources is cited as a prime issue for coastal management. Where an ICZM initiative is, or becomes, a statutory activity, the financing issues may be eased. In other cases there is a need for creativity to make the best use of funding mechanisms. – As regards economic (steering) instruments such as taxes, subsidies, rebate systems and tradable permits, they can greatly help in reaching ICZM goals. These instruments are promising but not widely used to implement ICZM at present.

Overall, improved communication and information availability may be key in convincing the private sector that ICZM is in its best long-term interest, and mobilising investment that supports ICZM. Comprehensive information at all phases of the process also plays an important role in sending the correct signals to the market system, thus improving the chances that the market will promote ICZM-supporting activities and exchanges. Legal instruments may be needed to encourage short-term players to act sustainably.

_ _ _ _ _

Lessons from the European Commission Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), ISBN 92-828-6471-5, can be downloaded from here: EU report. The reproduction of the publication is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

The analysis in the EU report is as valid as ever, because in essence better administration of coastal resources is holistic, cross-sectoral and multi-level action. The demand for this kind of management is increasing when climate change impacts in coastal areas are being felt more and more.

The most important conclusions of the EU report for different ICZM steps are presented in this Coastal Challenges’ article. The original text is often cited directly – this is in harmony with the publishing conditions of the report.

Launching the ICZM process

In ICZM initiatives, all the levels of actors need to be involved in their own capacity and sphere of competence. Local ICZM activity is usually not effective when there is a policy vacuum at higher levels.

Local level administrations may be constrained in their ability to contribute to ICZM for several reasons e.g. lacking personnel capacity or “local politics”.

Many local-level projects need guidelines and strategic action at the national level to facilitate local initiatives. Also higher level endorsement is often needed for efficient local implementation.

Environmental challenges related to boat traffic in the Baltic Sea cannot be solved in isolation. Photo from Finland, (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

Commonly a lead agency is necessary for ICZM initiatives. Sometimes universities can play this role well. Nevertheless, lead agencies which are perceived as threats by other participants are not the best choice.

Individuals and groups with the right drive can be a great asset to ICZM. In all the cases, the initiatives need an adequate link to decision makers, so that the exercise is integrated into the formal management system and does not remain an academic exercise. A secretariat is normally necessary and a mission statement useful.

In ICZM, problems are not resolved in isolation: the initiatives should be multi-sectoral and multi-objective. However, ICZM initiatives are often launched in reaction to specific issues.

Often ICZM projects use voluntary, non-statutory approaches in their initial phases. Whatever the approach, ultimately success of the ICZM initiative will depend on the commitment of partners in the project.

The ICZM process: information issues

Reliable and appropriate information sets the scene for well-founded decision making and sustainable management. Different types of information are needed at different phases of the ICZM process. Up-to-date cadastral data are a pre-requisite in all coastal management phases (cadastre = public register showing the details of ownership and value of land). A strategy is needed for the collection, processing and diffusion of data and information.

Planners and managers have a tendency to focus on the details specifically related to their own competences. They may concentrate on getting every last piece of data on one limited component of the overall coastal system, while ignoring the bigger picture. Too many coastal projects start by setting out to collect all available data about the target area – this is often a waste of resources.

An ICZM project can fail when too much emphasis is put on acquiring the complete information before action. It is important to be pragmatic and not to lose the momentum. Photo from Hurghada, Egypt (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

While it may be appropriate to do a quick preliminary scan to determine availability, an information strategy should start by analysing what data and information are required, for whom and for what purpose. Raw data only become useful by analysing them and putting them into context.

Assessments are a broad category for collecting raw data and transforming them into useful information. They include environmental impact assessments, strategic environmental assessments, resource accounting, valuation exercises, spatial impact assessment, risk assessment, and cost-benefit exercises. Each of these tools aims to evaluate some of the impacts of actual or proposed management options.

Assessments should not be seen as a formula for making decisions, in lieu of a consultative/participatory process. Rather, their purpose is to inform the political debate.

A failure in knowledge diffusion is one of the key reasons for the continuing destruction of coastal landscapes and resources. Many of the problems of the coast can be traced to the fact that the required information or understanding has never reached the correct audience.

An ICZM initiative should identify the policies associated with key issues – and identify the reponsible organisations and individuals, politicians and decision makers who need the information. Information management technology can help, but also often fails to provide information to users due to its highly technical nature.

_ _ _ _ _

Lessons from the European Commission Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), ISBN 92-828-6471-5, can be downloaded from here: EU report (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/vol2.pdf). The reproduction of the publication is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

The answer to those who doubt is that well-managed reefs which are relatively free of human impacts have shown resilience to coral bleaching and reef mortality. On the other hand, the badly managed reefs which were already affected by local impacts (such as pollution and overfishing), have often shown very limited recovery or no recovery at all.

Future reefs may look like this: eroding coral rock with little live cover. Photo from Utila, Honduras, (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

When we try to manage human impacts in the world´s coral areas, reef rehabilitation techniques are an important tool. Rehabilitation together with other local management activities (regulation of fisheries, control of pollution, development of marine parks) is likely to improve ecosystem resilience. Those reefs which are well-managed will have a real possibility of surviving as productive and functional systems, when they are impacted by global environmental pressures.

The above is some of the key information included in the Reef Rehabilitation Manual edited by A.J. Edwards and published by Coral Reef Targeted Research & Capacity Building for Management Program, Australia, in 2010. The Manual, its sister publication Reef Restoration Concepts & Guidelines and other useful coastal management publications can be found at http://www.gefcoral.org. The direct link to the Reef Rehabilitation Manual is here: Reef Rehabilitation Manual

In spite of the considerable progress in coral reef restoration over the last 35 years, this field of science is still in its infancy. There have been a few successful rehabilitation projects already – and many others which have not met their goals.

Healthy coral builds incredible structures in the Red Sea. With the changing environmental conditions these living structures may disappear. Photo from Egypt (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Reef Rehabilitation Manual states that the primary aims of this handbook are:

1. “to reduce the proportion of reef rehabilitation projects that fail”,
2. “to introduce protocols for methods that could allow larger areas of degraded reef to be repopulated with corals  whilst minimising collateral damage to reefs where corals are sourced”,
3. “to highlight factors to take into consideration at the planning stage so as to minimise the risk of failure”, and
4. “to underline the current limitations of reef rehabilitation”

The publication seeks to “disseminate protocols that will, on the one hand, increase the chance of success of active restoration projects and on the other, reduce the impact of these projects on the natural reef if they fail”.

The Manual tells us that normally a two-step process is required when we want to supply coral transplants for large scale rehabilitation projects. The steps are:

1. small fragments of coral or coral spat (settled larvae) are reared in nurseries until they are big enough to survive on a degraded reef,
2. the nursery-reared colonies are transplanted to stable reef areas (obviously attaching them securely is important)

Reef Rehabilitation Manual has three central technical chapters. They build on work and describe protocols which have been developed in several countries. The technical chapters help the reef manager construct and manage a nursery for farming of coral fragments, offer information on how to rear coral larvae for restoration, and give instructions for deployment of coral transplants on a degraded reef.

Finally, it is important to remember that the best alternative is to be proactive and avoid ecosystem degradation. The Manual provides this reminder: “Although restoration can enhance conservation efforts, restoration is always a poor second to the preservation of original habitats.”

How to be prepared?

• Find out if you live or work in an area, which could be affected by a tsunami. Know the elevation of the area. Evacuation orders are often based on these numbers.
• Plan evacuation routes. Areas 30 meters above sea level or 3 kilometers inland are often recommended.
• Remember that school evacuation plan may require you to pick your children up. Know the plan.
• Practice your evacuation plan.
• When you travel, know the local tsunami evacuation protocols. Remember that the third or higher floors in reinforced concrete hotel structures may offer safety.

Preparedness for tsunamis is an important part of costal zone management programs. Set-back areas, land use planning, construction standards and contingency planning are some of the necessary elements. Photo copyright (c) 2011 Erkki Siirila.

What to do during a potential tsunami situation?

• Get prepared, if you are in the coastal zone and there is an earthquake which lasts 20 seconds or longer.
• During an earthquake you should first protect yourself: drop, cover and hold on.
• When there is no more shaking, you and the people around you should quickly move  to higher ground away from the coast. A tsunami could hit you within minutes.
• Remember that downed power lines and damaged bridges and buildings could be dangerous. Aftershocks increase the risk.

What to do during a tsunami watch?

• Follow radio or television stations for emergency information.
• Locate your family members. Review evacuation plans together. Get prepared for evacuation in case of a tsunami warning.

What to do during a tsunami warning?

• After hearing an official tsunami warning or detecting signs of a tsunami, evacuate immediately.
• Do not forget to take your emergency preparedness kit with you.
• If it is not safe for you, it’s not safe for your pets. Take them with you.
• To protect yourself from the tsunami, get to a location which is high enough or far away from the coast.
• Watching a tsunami could put your life at risk.

What to do after a tsunami?

• Follow radio or television stations for updated information.
• Tsunami waves may continue attacking the coast for hours. It is safe to return home only after local officials tell you it is safe.
• Get first aid as needed before helping others.
• When you see complex emergency situations, call professionals with the right equipment to help. Trying to rescue others without appropriate equipment and knowledge is dangerous.
• Offer help to people who require special assistance (e.g. children, elderly people and persons with disabilities).
• Remember that your presence in disaster areas might interfere with emergency response operations and put you at further risk.
• Avoid using the telephone when not necessary. Use it only for emergency calls.
• Remember that in buildings tsunami water can cause floors to crack and walls to collapse. Be careful when re-entering buildings.
• When cleaning up, be cautious and wear protective clothing.
• Keep an eye on pets and domestic animals.

Connectivity is an important consideration in coastal management and in the design of marine protected areas (MPAs) and MPA networks. When fish larvae and fertilized coral eggs move in water currents from one place to another, these movements become crucial for the location of the new generation of these animals.

Most marine organisms on reefs and in coastal waters are relatively sessile during most of their life. This sedentary lifestyle is abandoned during reproduction: most reef species produce pelagic eggs which become pelagic larvae. Some of these pelagic larvae become fish. When fish grow older, they may travel to another location, while juvenile coral colonies will generate a reef where the coral eggs and larvae end up – in case the marine environment is suitable for reef growth.

Some habitats are critical to the early developmental stages of fish, lobster, and shrimp, while others serve as spawning or feeding grounds. Marine organisms also migrate daily and/or seasonally between habitats. The daily shifts commonly involve nightly feeding migrations between feeding and resting habitat. In some fish species, these daily movements lead to nutrient transfer between seagrass/mangrove areas and the coral reef.

Connectivity is an important consideration in the management of this Red Sea coral reef surrounding an Egyptian island. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The marine ecosystem is so complex that many connectivity issues are poorly known. Nevertheless, this field of marine ecology is advancing: better understanding is crucial for sound marine management.  An example of these advances is the publication in 2010 of “Preserving Reef Connectivity: A Handbook for Marine Protected Area Managers”, which can be found here: Handbook

Special attention in the Handbook (written by P.F. Sale et al., edited by Lisa Benedetti and published by UNU-INWEH), which is the main source for this Coastal Challenges’ article, is given to populational connectivity. This includes

1. Evolutionary (genetic) connectivity; and
2. Demographic (ecological) connectivity.

In the Handbook, number 1 is said to “be informative when considering long-term (evolutionary) and large-scale biogeographic dispersal patterns of organisms. It can also be useful for managers wanting to assess the genetic uniqueness of populations when making decisions concerning biodiversity preservation.”

Number 2 “involves the extent of linkages that occurs among nearby local populations of a species due to the exchange of individuals”. This type of connectivity is important for the design and management of marine protected areas (MPAs) and no-take fishery reserves (NTRs), and when we want to know the ideal amount of coral reef habitat to protect.

The results of recent investigations are clear: pelagic larvae do not drift aimlessly in the ocean. They use for example sensory capabilities to minimize the extent of dispersal. In many species the larvae have the capability to settle on suitable reef habitat and specific microhabitats.

Connectivity amongst populations of reef species is primarily due to dispersal during larval life; demographic connectivity takes place on scales of up to tens of kilometers. The concept of demographically well connected populations for example across the Caribbean is not true and belongs to the past. Only genetic (evolutionary) connectivity links these habitats far away from each other, when larvae occasionally get transported beyond the usual dispersal range.

When marine parks are intended to function as fisheries management tools, the smaller scale of demographic connectivity should be taken into consideration in the MPA design – and in the design of MPA networks. This type of connectivity is worth remembering also when coral reefs experience massive destruction (hurricanes, bleaching, crown-of-thorns attacks): demographic connectivity defines the limits of natural re-seeding.

Coastal development may damage important inshore areas used by developing fishes and other organisms. For example, pathways between these and offshore habitats may be disrupted. Negative impacts during an organism’s early life stages may also have consequences for the abundance of adults. In addition, linked food webs may be affected. Furthermore, daily or seasonal migration routes could be disrupted. – MPAs and MPA networks should be large enough to encompass the interlinked habitats.

Spawning aggregations of groupers are an exciting phenomenon in many parts of tropical seas. During large scale oceanic movements and gatherings, species behaving in this manner are vulnerable to overfishing. The spawning sites should be part of no-take fishery reserves (NTRs). (More information on NTRs specifically can be found in “Fully protected marine reserves: a guide” by Callum M. Roberts and Julie P. Hawkins, 2000, which can be downloaded from here: Guide)

In general, NTRs promote fish survival and reproduction even when serious overfishing takes place in the surrounding area. Studies have shown that four positive changes inside NTRs take place. These changes, which may benefit fished populations outside reserves, are summarized in the Handbook on reef connectivity. They are:

1. Increased reproductive output (increases in fish abundance, spawning biomass, mean age, and body size result in this change)
2. Higher net export of juveniles and adults (to surrounding fished areas);
3. Higher net export of eggs and larvae (to surrounding fished areas); and
4. Protection and recovery of crucial habitats/ecosystems (key underwater areas for the fished species)

The NTR studies indicate that when neighboring NTRs are not more than 10-30 km apart, appropriate levels of populational connectivity exist for most reef species targeted by fishermen. As indicated above, early hydrodynamic models predicted dispersal distances of hundreds of kilometers. Based on new evidence, even relatively small MPAs may be self-sustaining.

In a world of climate change, it is important that coral reefs and other coastal ecosystems are managed as effectively as possible. Their natural resilience can be supported by taking connectivity into consideration.

The purpose is to let the reefs rest under circumstances in which as few environmental pressures as possible affect the coral. “We will give the reefs time to recover naturally,” Sunan Arunnopparat, director general of the National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Department, said in an interview. The comments were published by the Thai newspaper The Nation on 20 January, 2011.

The director general added that more than 80% of the coral in the areas was affected by bleaching.  Overall the situation is serious: more than 50% of all the reefs in southern Thailand show signs of whitening and loss of colour. Divers visiting Thailand tell that it is not question of bleaching only. They say that at least in some places a high percentage of the bleached coral has actually died.

Widespread bleaching and death of corals could be one of the first concrete signs of climate change in the ocean. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

While announcing the ban, Sunan Arunnopparat also told that the restrictions were introduced in consultation with academics. As regards the duration of the emergency measures, Sunan Arunnopparat said: “The recovery of the coral will be monitored before the ban is lifted.”

In addition to the reef closure, the Department will apply other habitat protection measures. Limiting admissions to national parks and educating the tourists in environmentally sound practices were mentioned as examples.

The new restrictions are likely to hurt Thailand’s tourism industry and especially the dive business in the short term. In the long term the dive business may benefit. In case the new conservation measures lower enough the combined environmental stress factors on the reefs they could prove helpful – globally coral reefs are mainly threatened by the warming of seawater. The root cause is climate change.  Not only tourism is at stake, reef health is crucial to maintenance of local fisheries and prevention of coastal erosion.

The coral bleaching – whitening due to the loss of the symbiotic zooxanthella microalgae from coral tissues – was first observed across the Andaman Sea in May 2010 after a surge in seawater temperatures. Serious bleaching was reported also from other parts of the Indian Ocean in 2010. Furthermore, similar news came from some reef areas in the western Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea.

Bleached coral often dies. As coral grows slowly, the recovery of a reef will usually take years. As coral reefs often suffer from several environmental stress factors, there is no guarantee that a damaged reef will recover.

Healthy reefs are important for the success of dive tourism in many developing countries. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The environmental challenge we are talking about is that phosphorus, an essential plant nutrient, is transported from the farming fields through runoff into the rivers and sea. In the sea water, elevated levels of phosphorus cause eutrophication.

Yara, a chemical company, has together with a few Finnish partners developed a gypsum-based technique to stabilize soil particles in the farming fields. The method reduces soil (and nutrient) erosion caused by surface runoff.

The results achieved indicate that a high percentage of the phosphorus stays in the soil when the new technique is used. Consequently, harmful nutrient inputs into the waterways and sea are highly reduced. The new method also helps the farmer as more phosphorus is available for the agricultural plants. Furthermore, there is less need for costly, additional phosphorus fertilizers.

In spite of not being visible in this image, eutrophication caused by excessive nutrients is a problem on the Baltic coast of Finland. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The method involves spreading of a gypsum-based product on the farming field after harvest or before planting. The product, which is basically gypsum (calcium sulphate), infiltrates with water into soil. According Yara, this well-known chemical compound in its slightly developed form improves “particle aggregation and dissolved phosphorus retention”. In addition, “better soil structure means that the earth resists rain and melting snow better and therefore prevents erosion and phosphorus leakage”.

Gypsum is useful to the farmer also because it improves the plants’ ability to utilise the phosphorus reserves of the soil. In addition, farmers can continue their agricultural activities as before. For the gypsum treatment to be effective, it would need to be repeated once in three to four years.

Gypsum treatment of the soil could be important news for many countries. Soil,sediment and nutrient runoff is degrading forestry and agricultural areas around the world. This runoff is also killing shallow marine ecosystems. Could gypsum help save the world’s endangered coral reefs?

A brochure on the gypsum-based method to control agricultural runoff into the sea can be found here:

http://orgprints.org/16037/1/Pietola.pdf

Under the heading “Focus on our footprint: marine fisheries” the report reminds us of certain key facts:

• Wild fish is an important food source for billions of people. Nearly 3 billion people get 15% or more of their crucial animal protein intake from fish.
• Most stocks of the top 10 commercial species – this corresponds to about 30% of marine catches – are either fully exploited or overexploited.  No significant  increases in the catches of these stocks can be expected in the near future.
• 52% of all marine fish stocks are fully exploited already.
• 28% of marine fish stocks monitored in 2007 had serious problems. Of these endangered stocks 19% were overexploited, 8% were depleted and only 1% recovering from depletion.
• The habitats that support the fisheries are important areas to conserve. These areas are not only fish nurseries and spawning grounds. They are important also from the biodiversity point of view.  In addition, they provide coastal protection during storms and support marine-related tourism.

Bad governance is an expression which is used in the Living Planet Report to describe the state of the world fisheries – these two words are likely to be a good summary.

School of small barracudas in the Red Sea. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

What does the Report propose in order to make our fisheries better managed? These are some of the suggestions found in the publication, which concentrates on the human footprint on our planet:

• Science-based fisheries management can help increase fisheries production in the long term. It also makes the fisheries and marine ecosystems more resistant to pollution, ocean acidification and climate change. Other benefits include safeguarding important food supplies for coastal communities.
• In order to make fisheries management sustainable, the following needs to occur in specific activity areas: Drastic catch reductions in many marine fisheries need to accepted now in order to have benefits in the long term. Fishing governance needs to be improved especially in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Expansion of aquaculture needs to be balanced with the protection of wild fish stocks, biodiversity and habitats.
• Overall, fisheries’ biocapacity needs to be increased. This means maintaining fish stocks at optimal population and age levels to maximize growth. At the ecosystem level this means better habitat conservation by establishing protected areas, controlling coastal pollution and curbing carbon dioxide emissions.

The WWF Living Planet Report 2010 can be downloaded from here:

Living Planet Report 2010

“The whole coastal zone management effort started in the United States in 1965 with the particular problem of marshland wetlands in Long Island, New York. And then it spread from there to the whole of New York State, and it spread from there to the whole of the United States. And pretty soon, by 1972, president Nixon had signed an act in congress that there would be a program for the United States to protect coastal resources all around, all the coasts of the United States.”

“It was set up so that each state would get federal grants, there would be some money coming from the federal government from Washington D.C. to each of the coastal states so they could set up a conservation program for the coastal area. But each state had its own independence so that in everyone of the 30 states that participated, there was a different theme. In New Jersey it was strictly in the regulation of the development, in Florida it was strictly in the education and projects to help people in local cities and counties.”

“This coastal zone management idea that the United States started in 1972 quickly spread to many other countries so that Sri Lanka and the Philippines and many other countries started to establish coastal zone management programs where they would put a central agency in charge of all the things that can affect the coastal environments and their resources, fisheries et cetera.”

John R. Clark, grand old man of integrated coastal zone management, being interviewed in the Florida Keys. Photo (c) 2002 Erkki Siirila.

This is how John R. Clark describes the biggest challenges in the management of coastal resources, when he was interviewed in the Florida Keys in 2002:

“The biggest problem is to try to coordinate and integrate all the different agencies like shipping, defense, land use management, transportation and utilities development and all these different functions, to try to coordinate what they do. It’s very difficult because all these agencies are very selfish. They just want to do what they want to do. And it’s sometimes very difficult to coordinate their activities and put in place a superpower that will tell all these agencies what they must do in the interest of saving habitats, protecting marine species – even like turtles that are endangered in almost all the world – but the big fisheries included. And also the recreation benefits, clear, clean water, clean beaches, all this. It has to be integrated together because no one agency in any country has the power to do this.  There has to be a superpower created.”

The whole interview, “John R. Clark & Integrated Coastal Zone Management” can be watched on Youtube. The web address of the interview is  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvcw_petP2w . Here is the direct link to the Youtube video:

John R. Clark & Integrated Coastal Zone Management

In spite of travelling to Cancún pessimistic, probably most of the participants are returning home optimistic. The reason is that the future of climate talks within the UN framework has been saved, thanks to the compromises by the more than 190 participating countries.

In addition to saving the face of the UN climate negotiations’ mechanism, the following was achieved in Cancún:

• There was an agreement (no signed commitments were achieved in Cancún) according to which the countries limit the average global temperature rise to two degrees.
• The national emission cut targets related to the previous negotiation phase in Copenhagen became part of the Cancún decisions.
• The participating countries decided on long-term (until 2020), annual 100 billion U.S. dollar funding from developed nations to developing countries and their climate change -related measures. The management mechanism of this financing package, which has its origin in the Copenhagen negotiations, was developed – it is still open how much each industrialised country will contribute.
• The states agreed on emission cut reporting: there was consensus on the transparency including the monitoring measures. (In order to guarantee impartial reporting, there is still scope for the development of country-level verification measures.)
• Agreement was achieved on carbon sinks, transfer of clean energy technology and compensations for the conservation of tropical forests.

There was no agreement on the follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. The Protocol (currently the most significant international instrument for climate change measures) will be valid until the end of 2012.

Climate change will warm up the waters even in northern Norway. Traditionally, fishing has been the main income source here. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

It is also important to remember that the activities within the UN framework are not all the work that needs to be done in order to control climate change. “The outcome does not change the fact that most of the important work of cutting emissions will be driven outside the UN process”, said Michael A. Levi, climate negotiations’ expert of Council on Foreign Relations to New York Times.

The UN climate change negotiations will continue in Durban, South Africa, in 2011. Our seas, oceans and coasts cannot wait.

(The negotiation process is based on UNFCCC, which is the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. UNFCCC was one of the results of the UNCED “Earth Summit” held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The Kyoto Protocol is an UNFCCC tool. The United States is not a party to the Protocol. – To control global climate change, the world’s countries should agree on binding limits and measures. Probably also more work on international trade on emission rights will be needed.)

Poor people, like artisanal fishermen in African coastal villages, need progress in many areas of their lives.  On the other hand, their wellbeing is being threatened by excessive consumption by others who are better off.

On page 81 the UNDP report states: “The main threat to maintaining progress in human development comes from the increasingly evident unsustainability of production and consumption patterns. Current production models rely heavily on fossil fuels. We now know that this is unsustainable—because the resources are finite and their impacts dangerous. The close link between economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions needs to be severed for human development to become truly sustainable.”

The report points out that developed countries are already alleviating the worst effects by increasing recycling and investing in public transport and infrastructure, while most developing countries are advancing slowly because of the high costs and low availability of clean energy sources.  In the report, developed countries are encouraged to support developing countries’ transition to more sustainable human development.

Also the use and distribution of financial and natural resources across individuals and generations is seen as an important, broader sustainability issue by the authors of the UN report. This policy aspect is considered extremely important now when we are facing global ecological threats.

The future of Red Sea hawksbill turtles depends on conservation policies.Successful policies take into consideration the human aspects of development. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Human Development Report 2010 reminds us of the problem that there is no agreement among the stakeholders and specialists on sustainability, i.e. what it means for human development and how to assess and measure it. It is not totally clear what is necessary for the green economy and green growth, and how they can support and accelerate human development.

In spite of the lacking agreement, “all these  a l t e r n a t i v e  indicators show that the world has become less sustainable”, the UNDP report states.  What is needed, in addition to agreement on indicators, is “the spread of new ideas and technological innovations (which) will be key to allowing countries to achieve green growth”.

On page 82, Human Development Report 2010 summarises the current development and sustainability status of the world in the following words: “Two decades after the first Human Development Report there is little evidence of progress in making the world more sustainable or in effectively protecting vulnerable people against shocks. The effects of the largest financial crisis in decades can still be felt, and the continuing reliance on fossil fuels is threatening irreparable damage to our environment and to the human development of future generations. These developments pose serious questions about the long-run feasibility of the world’s current production and consumption patterns.”

Human Development Report 2010 helps us understand crucial background issues in environmental management, including coastal and marine conservation. Here is the link to this useful UNDP publication: http://hdr.undp.org/en/

Dr. Baird estimates that approximately 80% of Acropora coral colonies and 50% of colonies by other species have died during the past six months on the bleached coral reefs in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

Healthy-looking and bleached coral side by side. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The reefs are numerous: the mass bleaching affects an area which extends from the Seychelles to Sulawesi and the Philippines. Included are reefs in Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia.  The most diverse reefs of the world are found in the so-called “Coral Triangle” which is within the affected area.

In the Underwatertimes article Dr Baird comments the seriousness of the situation by stating that the live percentage coral cover on the reefs could drop from 50% to about 10% (these are average values).  The recovery, if it ever occurs, will take years.  Fisheries and tourism in the affected coastal and island nations will suffer: the livelihoods of millions of people are likely to be hampered.

The bleaching is being caused by elevated mean seawater temperatures which result in the loss of symbiotic microalgae from the coral tissues. As the pigments are in the algae, the coral colony turns white. When the seawater temperature stays higher than normal for weeks, the bleached coral colonies often die – for nutrition the coral depends on the algae.

The warming of seawater to levels which are higher than normal is related to the planet-wide effects of the periodic El Niño and La Niña weather disturbances, which in turn seem to be getting more extreme with global climate change.

In non-scientific terms the recent events in South-East Asia could perhaps be summarised by stating that “the rainforests of the sea are dying”.  People who have seen a healthy coral reef might also use the expression “a very sad and serious ecological disaster is taking place”.

Coral builds impressive living structures in the tropical oceans. Climate change, seawater warming and coral bleaching may kill these underwater cities. Photo from Hurghada,Egypt, copyright (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The article written by Shaul Schwarz (reportage by Getty for Time) helps us understand that in spite of being immense, the oceans are not invulnerable – this is why the urgent changes in marine management proposed by Earle are needed.

To Earle, the extremely limited coverage of marine protected areas reflects the fact that we actually consider the oceans as a “supermarket and sewer”: The seas are being overfished by trawlers and long-liners, and this is made possible by government subsidies. More than 90 percent of the populations of large predatory fish like sharks may have been lost while those of the important food fish bluefin tuna are only a fraction of their original levels. The Time article indicates that actually a global disruption of the marine food chains is taking place.

The article on Earle describes the situation of the world’s coral reefs, another biodiversity hot spot, by stating that “pollution and fertilizer runoff from agriculture have pushed one-third of the more than 700 reef-building corals close to extinction; 70 percent of all coral reefs could be gone by midcentury”.

Unauthorised fishing keeps the fish populations of this Caribbean reef at a low level. The baseline values are not well known either. Image from the Utila marine park,the Bay Islands of Honduras, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Because of the burning of fossil fuels, our seas are becoming more acidic – the carbon dioxide dissolving in the seas lowers their pH. As the oceans’ capacity to store carbon is 50 times that of the atmosphere, the oceans were thought to be a buffer to the adverse effects of climate change. This thinking is changing as no one can predict the outcome accurately. What is known already is that the increasing acidity of the oceans will cause calcification problems to many marine animals. This will weaken their physical structures.

After all, the biggest problem may be the “shifting baselines” (an expression used by marine scientist Daniel Pauly and cited in the Time article).  The expression means that ”we can’t tell how bad it’s gotten because we don’t remember how good it was”.

As regards Dr. Earle, she plans to stop the degradation of the oceans (or at least alleviate the problems) through her nonprofit organisation Mission Blue. Earle has already found many influential supporters who agree on the importance of new marine sanctuaries in key biodiversity areas. The new MPAs would not stop climate change but they would keep the environmental pressures under control locally and regionally.

The Carpenter and Maragos manual presents useful tips and background material for the management of mangrove communities in the tropics.  (The three most important marine ecosystems in the tropical coastal zones are the coral reefs, mangroves and seagrass beds.) The information on mangroves is summarised in a slightly edited form below: 

Sustainable uses and values of mangroves: Mangroves maintain nearshore fisheries and are an important area for fish & shellfish production in the sea. Mangrove communities also protect the coast from storms; especially low-lying areas benefit.  By trapping of nutrients and sediments from drainage, mangroves protect coral reefs, sea grass meadows and coastal waters in general. In addition, wood and other forest products are obtained from mangrove areas.

Sensitivity to environmental changes: Changes in tidal flushing patterns damage mangroves.  Oil spills can be extremely harmful to mangrove communities.  Mangroves are also sensitive to salinity changes.  Furthermore, excessive harvesting can weaken the natural production and regeneration capacity of the mangrove ecosystem.

Development hazards: Environmental impacts which change the topography and water flow in the mangrove areas can be considered development hazards (for example damming, dredging, bulk-heading and impoundment). Activities which result in excessive sediment production may also damage the mangroves. Freshwater discharges, freshwater diversions and groundwater pumping are other examples of possible development-related threats. Naturally, clear-cutting, deforestation and land reclamation may seriously damage or destroy a mangrove area.

Mitigation: Natural characteristics of water movement need to be maintained. Harvesting limits need to be set and enforced. Buffer zones are a useful tool in mangrove management.

Mangrove management is an important component of coastal zone management when we get prepared for global climate change and sea-level rise. Youtube provides access to a Wetlands International video highlighting these issues. The link to the video is here:

The manual (not widely available in these days) presents useful conclusions  for the management of environmental impacts in seagrass meadows everywhere in the tropics.  (Together with mangroves and coral reefs, seagrass beds are the most important marine ecosystems of the tropical coastal zones. In addition, seagrass meadows are key components of shallow-water nature in temperate waters.)

The information presented by Carpenter and Maragos is summarised in a slightly edited form below: 

Sustainable uses and values of seagrass meadows: The biological productivity is high; especially the fish and shellfish production is important. Seagrass beds are nursery areas for reef and mangrove species.  These underwater meadows have useful functions in beach sand replenishment and act as a beach stabilisation area. Seagrass beds are also part of important synergistic interactions with onshore mangroves and offshore coral reefs. In addition, they are feeding areas of sea turtles and dugongs / manatees.

Sensitivity to environmental changes: Chemical pollution, changes in currents (leading to scouring or stagnation), changes in sedimentation patterns (leading to accumulation or burial), changes in longshore sand movements (disrupting the long-term balance of coastal sediment movements), dredging on offshore reefs (leading to lack of protection offered by the reef and resulting in changes in sediment movements), and cutting of onshore mangroves (resulting in loose sediments and lack of physical/runoff protection on the landward side of the seagrass beds).

Development hazards: Dredging, filling and construction of coastal structures commonly put the near-by seagrass beds at risk. Also oil and chemical spills can harm the seagrass meadows.  In addition, damming and blocking the natural water flow and sediment movements may  harm the seagrass communities.

Mitigation: The effects of projects on sediment and water movements need to be understood in advance. Damage to adjacent reefs and mangroves need to be avoided in projects leading to environmental impacts. In causeway construction, culverts and bridge openings help maintain the natural water circulation and sedimentation patterns thus protecting the seagrass meadows. Locating nonwater dependent facilities onshore is part of sound seagrass management.

The following Youtube video by Seagrasswatch.org is an excellent summary of  the global importance of seagrass meadows:

National conservation activities benefit the Great Barrier Reef of Australia. Global warming is likely to be the most significant threat. Photo (c)2010 Erkki Siirila.

A useful publication in local and national reef conservation work is How to assess environmental impacts on tropical islands and coastal areas: South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) training manual. The manual was edited by Richard A. Carpenter and James E. Maragos.  It was prepared by Environment and Policy Institute, East-West Center, and sponsored by Asian Development Bank. In spite of having been published in 1989, the manual is still a useful handbook not only for EIAs in the Pacific but for tropical coastal management around the world.

As getting the manual may be complicated, some of its conclusions concerning reef management are presented below. The original material has been edited.

Sustainable uses and values of coral reefs: The support of coral reefs to marine fisheries is crucial. Coral reefs can be an important fishing ground for local inhabitants when the fishing is implemented in a sustainable manner. In heatlhy reef areas, snorkeling and scuba diving may significantly benefit the local income and employment.  Reefs also protect the beaches and islands from storms and coastal erosion. Farming of pearl oysters and giant clams are examples of the aquaculture potential of healthy reefs.

Non-sustainable uses and easily degraded values of coral reefs: Harvesting of coral for jewelry is often unsustainable. Also harvesting of exotic marine organisms for aquariums is a risk for reef health. In addition, coral mining for lime production can seriously damage the reefs.

Sensitivity to environmental changes: Long-lasting fresh-water flows reduce salinity and may harm the reef environment.  Sediment runoff from land and sediment particles in the water column reduce light available to the corals and interfere with filter feeding; sediments also accumulate on the reef substrate and sea bottom. Corals do not tolerate big changes in water temperature either.  Toxic chemicals from on-land activities and ships/harbours are harmful to reefs.  Boat anchors, storm waves and blasting can cause long-lasting damage in the reef environment.  Nutrient inputs can lead to phytoplankton blooms in tropical waters; excessive nutrients also favour harmful growth of benthic algae on the reef surface. Oil spills can kill a reef because of the toxic, light, temperature and oxygen effects. Reduced water circulation in the sea hampers the removal of sediment and waste products from the coral polyps. In addition, sea-level changes may threaten the corals (drying, exposure to waves).

Development hazards: Badly planned coastal construction activities including dredging and filling can harm the reef environment in several ways. Storm runoff and discharge of mine waste are other development-related reef threats. Soil erosion from roads, agriculture and construction sites is a well-known reef killer.  Also freshwater diversions and discharges of heated water are harmful.  Sewage outfalls and discharges from processing plants (fisheries, agriculture) kill reefs when badly implemented. Discharges of oil and pollutants from the industry are another threat. Overfishing and destructive fishing practices affect not only the fish populations but also result in decreased live coral cover. Finally, offshore oil drilling and other petroleum operations can lead to serious reef damage.

Mitigation: Siting development away from the reef reduces the risks; nonwater dependent activities need not be close to the coral areas.  Marine parks and protected areas are an important reef conservation tool;  sometimes their creation can be considered a compensation measure for areas damaged. Settling ponds are a useful sediment control tool on land; silt curtains help control sediment flows in the sea. Deep ocean outfalls for sewage and industrial waste waters are recommended when better measures for waste water control cannot be put in place. Regulations need to be set and enforced to mitigate the following activities: overexploitive and destructive fishing, coral harvesting, and pollution from on-land activities and shipping. In addition, construction activities which modify water circulation, currents and water levels in lagoons and coastal areas need to be carefully planned and controlled.

Plastic is strong, versatile and inexpensive. It is also lightweight and moisture resistant. Being so durable and so widely used, plastic materials ultimately become waste which is present everywhere and which degrades very slowly.

Plastic bottles floating in the river. Photo from the Rio de la Plata waterfront, Buenos Aires, Argentina, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

In the ocean, plastic debris is believed to kill 100,000 marine mammals every year, as well as millions of birds and fish.  Nevertheless, the most dangerous aspect of the plastic debris is hidden from our eyes: it is the microscopic fragmented plastic particles, which float in the sea and are transported thousand of nautical miles in the ocean currents.

There are more and more of this kind of microscopic plastic particles everywhere. These particles cannot be removed from the ocean and they are believed to be more toxic than previously thought.

In the sea, the microscopic plastic particles are ingested by the small animals of zooplankton at the bottom of the food chains. Through fish and other larger marine animals these food chains lead to us humans. When we do not manage the plastic waste in a sustainable manner, we are polluting not only the oceans but also ourselves.

The plastic material entering the world oceans is an increasing problem around the world. Photo from Buenos Aires, Argentina, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

An excellent Coastalcare summary (written by  Claire Le Guern Lytle) of plastic pollution and its consequences in the marine environment can be read here:

http://coastalcare.org/2009/11/plastic-pollution/

Coral Restoration Foundation

This Vimeo video highlights the Nedimyer reef restoration work:

Tunisia – Marine protected areas need to be open areas. To achieve the conservation benefits, there is no need to close the protected areas. There are proven research results showing that marine protected areas increase the fish populations and therefore the income of fishermen using the protected areas and living around them.

Turkey – In order to conserve the monk seals, we need to keep the local fish stocks in a good and steady condition. In order to do that, we need to get the support of the local fishermen and the local people. We worked on that matter and this is why our project became a succesful project. If you don’t involve the local stakeholders and the local interested groups, you cannot succeed.

Cyprus – The biggest challenge in the creation of marine protected areas is mainly to convince the people, particularly those people whose lives depend on these areas, like professional and sports fishermen, owners of cruise boats, and divers. Fishermen should realise that by protecting the marine biodiversity they will eventually benefit because they are going to have a recovery of the biodiversity and fish stocks.

More opinions of Mediterranean marine park experts can be found in a Youtube video, from where also the above, slightly edited comments are. This is the link to the video: Return of the Groupers – Benefits of Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean – A television documentary

Even the depleted grouper populations have recovered in the well-managed Medes Islands' marine park in Spain. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

175 member countries are parties of CITES. The level of protection offered is related to the three CITES Appendices. Listing on Appendix I is an agreement to ban international commercial trade in the species (including its parts and products). Inclusion in Appendix II means that Parties agree on trade regulation in order to prevent overexploitation. An Appendix III listing means that Parties record and report trade levels.

Since 2002, whale sharks are protected under Appendix II of CITES. Image from La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

At the meetings governments vote for maintaining, decreasing or increasing protection. Changes to the protocals can be made if there is a 75 percent majority supporting a change in the status of the species. Scientific studies are used as background material. In the decision-making commercial and other national interests play a decisive role: those proposals which make sense from the conservation point of view often lose in the voting.  This is what happened to the proposed marine and coastal conservation reforms in Doha. 

Sharks: Several shark species were included in the four proposals aiming at better conservation of these marine predators. The scalloped hammerhead shark, the oceanic whitetip shark, the porbeagle shark and the spiny dogfish were among the candidates for more sustainable policies. The goal of the conservationists was to add in total eight shark species to Appendix II of CITES. This would have helped in cutting the international trade in shark meat and fins. The desired result was not reached as the commercial interests won.

Corals: There is an international demand for pink and red corals, which are endangered. In this situation it would have made sense to at least regulate the trade by listing these corals under Appendix II. (Currently, no international trade control or management mechanisms are in in place.) In Doha, the proposal concerning the pink and red coral species of the Coralliidae family and their listing under Appendix II, was rejected.

Atlantic Bluefin Tuna: Overexploitation has resulted in a population drop of this species. Inclusion on Appendix I of CITES was sought by the conservation-minded delegates. This would have given time for the recovery of the stock, as the international trade of the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna would have been banned. Japan and its allies, which were against the new rules, were able to reject the proposal.

Polar Bear: There was a proposal to have the polar bear listed under Appendix I. In this way the international trade of polar bears (300 individuals a year die as a result of hunting) would have been stopped. The U.S. was for the inclusion but Canada was against it. As climate change is complicating the life of the remaining 20,000-25,000 polar bears, the stopping of hunting would make sense. Nevertheless, the proposal to include the polar bear on the species list of Appendix I was not approved.

We have to live with the above CITES decisions until 2013, when the next meeting of the CITES Parties will take place in Thailand.

This article is partly based on excellent summaries of the developments at the Doha meeting by the Humane Society International, http://www.hsus.org.

The tsunami resulted in serious damage and lost lives also in the Juan Fernández archipelago, the home of Robinson Crusoe.  Eyewitness reports tell the megawaves caused destruction in places located 15 metres above the high-tide level. (Commonly tsunamis behave more like sudden and extreme high tides than normal waves.)

Sad events like these emphasise the importance of sound management of the coastal zone.  Wise people are proactive, while the less wise are reactive and pay a higher price: a well known fact in coastal risk management is that prevention costs less than reparation.

The wise never forget the power of the sea. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

In Chile, the government is aware that earthquakes are part of life. The Chileans cannot be critised for the lack of preparedness.

In any case, the first pictures taken after the earthquake in Juan Fernández in the Pacific Ocean show the power of tsunamis.  Lessons in coastal management can be learned by looking at the photos.

Wide construction-free zones on oceanic shores are one solution. Improving the tsunami warning systems would be another. Also better construction practices, which take into consideration the forces of nature, help minimise the damage.

Most of the people who suffered from the tsunami in Chile were not warned because of misunderstandings between authorities and hesitation during the crucial moments. Radio news had even transmitted messages telling there was no tsunami risk.

It is also possible that many people did not remember the simple safety rule the Chilean authorities use when they inform of precautionary measures: If you cannot keep your balance while experiencing an earthquake on the coast, the earthquake is so strong that it can produce a tsunami.  You should immediately escape.

The link to the first Chilean tsunami images, which are from Juan Fernández, is here:

Tsunami damage in the Juan Fernández archipelago, Chile  (Sorry, the photographer has removed the pictures from Flickr. This direct link is not working any more.)

Hundreds of thousands of people travel from Buenos Aires to the Atlantic coast of Argentina in January and February. The economic value of the free beach access is high. Image taken at San Clemente del Tuyu, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Private coastal spaces benefit a handful of people while public spaces benefit millions of people. The problem is the same in developing and developed countries. In southern Europe you can often see the beautiful Mediterranean but access to the sea is difficult because of private lands, through which you cannot even walk to the sea. The problem is the same in the Caribbean, where the local people commonly have lost access to some of their traditional beaches, because the access routes have been taken over by international hotel chains.

Respecting everyone’s right to shore access is a common issue to be solved in coastal zone management. In many countries at least the shore area up to the highest tide mark is public. Often there is also a wider, construction-free public set-back area on the shore.  Nevertheless, the access to this area where people have traditionally kept their boats and gone for a swim, has often been blocked by private properties.

The solution is not to forget the public access routes to these places.  The best example on how to respect everyone’s right to nature, both marine and terrestrial, is provided by the Nordic countries, in which “every man’s right” is a traditional legal concept. You may spend time within a private land area and walk through it to the beach without asking permission. The only exception are people’s houses, the privacy of which you need to respect.

As we know, private economic benefits in the form of employment, income sources and attractive investment conditions are important to all of us. Nevertheless, considering only them in decision-making is not the way to a sustainable society, in which benefits are shared equally between today’s citizens and those of the future generations .

When only the private benefits are taken into consideration, for instance coastal mangroves are commonly considered wasteland, which may be converted to more lucrative uses like shrimp ponds and construction sites for coastal hotels. This kind of development has taken place in many Central American and South-East Asian countries.

Crucial benefits of mangroves to the society as a whole have been forgotten when these ecosystems have been converted into uses which favour just a few investors and their employees.  These benefits include the unique protection provided by mangroves to coastal settlements when a hurricane or tsunami hits from the sea.  Mangroves also  stabilise the coastline and prevent shoreline erosion.

To continue with the mangroves & economics example, another benefit offered by these plant communities is the nursery function to commercially important fish and shrimp species.  In addition, mangroves produce organic matter which is an important food source for other marine ecosystems.  In the developing societies without sewage treatment plants mangroves help us by filtering the waste waters and by preventing eutrophication and algal blooms in the sea.

One way to summarise the total economic value of marine and coastal ecosystems is here 1):

• Direct values: production and consumption of goods such as fish, firewood, building materials, shells, corals, tourism and leisure, transport, etc.
• Indirect values: ecological services and functions such as shoreline protection, prevention of saltwater intrusion, storm and flood control, carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, biodiversity, etc.
• Option values: premium placed in future possible uses and applications such as those of extractive, leisure, pharmaceutical, industrial etc. character.
• Existence values: intrinsic significance in terms of culture, aesthetics, heritage, bequest, etc.

In addition, we need to remember that only the on-site / marketed benefits are those traditionally considered in the valuation of coastal zone resources, while those which are off-site / nonmarketed are commonly ignored.  This leads us to another way to summarise the economic valuation of coastal resources by using mangroves as an example 2):

• Marketed / on-site goods and services: usually included in an economic analysis (e.g. poles for construction, charcoal, woodchips, mangrove crabs).
• Marketed / off-site goods and services: may be included (e.g. fish or shellfish caught in the adjacent waters).
• Non-marketed / on-site goods and services: seldom included (e.g. medicinal uses of mangrove, domestic fuelwood, food in times of famine, nursery area for juvenile fish, feeding ground for estuarine fish and shrimp, viewing and studying wildlife).
• Non-marketed / off-site goods and services: usually ignored (e.g. ecologically important nutrient flows to estuaries, buffer to storm damage).

1) From R.V. Salm, John Clark and Erkki Siirila (2000): Marine and Coastal Protected Areas, A guide for planners and managers. IUCN. Washington DC. xxi + 371 pp.

2) From lecturing material used by coastal management consultant Dr. Peter Burbridge, U.K.

Mangrove and seagrass communities are the underestimated base of marine food chains in the tropics. They are also a place where the juveniles of many commercially important species grow up. Photo from the Florida Keys, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The book presents management strategies, methods and other key information both at the ICZM programme level and at the level of individual challenges like beach erosion, sewage pollution and port development. The starting point of the presentation is that the common non-coordinated and non-integrated management situation is inefficient in solving challenges related to sustainable development in coastal lands and waters.

ICZM is the answer as it applies a multiple use approach to resource allocation instead of the traditional single use approaches by competing sectoral agencies. Nevertheless, Clark admits that ICZM should not get involved in all aspects of all activities.  E.g. fisheries operations which do not interfere with other coastal activities are best managed by the fisheries agency alone.

According to Clark, ICZM is needed also because it is an approach which provides a framework for wide-ranging participation and resolution of conflicts between economic and conservation actors and activities.  These conflicts are a distinctive aspect of coastal development. In most countries a lead agency is necessary for effective ICZM coordination, Clark says.

At the beginning of the Handbook, Clark briefly mentions the biggest challenge in ICZM implementation in the world: the efforts have legal, political and managerial implications.  Clark says that many countries refuse to start ICZM “because of the difficulties of disturbing a pletophora of institutions that already regulate activities in coastal areas”.  Who would like to give up power and to share authority is the question that remains after the Clark “Bible” was published.

The last pages of the 694-page Handbook are devoted to 47 case histories. These practical studies describe a wide range of management challenges and solutions from around the globe.

What is the most important message of the book in a world where even the coastal development actors compete of power and where decisions are often based on short-term concerns?  It could be in this simple statement:  ”it is in the best interest of a country to achieve sustainability of its resources and long-term protection of its natural assets.”

Parts of Coastal Zone Management Handbook can be read through Google Books, in case you are interested and consider getting a copy for yourself.

Coastal Zone Management Handbook by John R. Clark provides answers to many resource use challenges which can be observed in this picture. Photo from Buenos Aires, Argentina, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Below, a number of these lessons learned are presented.  The summary was originally published in Marine and Coastal Protected Areas, A Guide for Planners and Managers, Third Edition, IUCN, 2000 (authors Rodney V. Salm, John R. Clark and Erkki Siirila):

The SMMA map shows the original marine park zones and their allowed uses. The SMMA is located in Saint Lucia. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

Here are the ten lessons learned, which were often considered the cornerstones of the SMMA success story:

1. There was local awareness of the importance of the venture when the development process began. The roots for the development had come to existence before any foreign support.  Also the need to do something about the resource use conflicts had been understood by the Soufriere community. Some of these people were local key individuals with good contacts. Their strong personal commitment towards the success of the venture was decisive.
2. During the final preparatory stages of the SMMA, before 1994, the three agencies which got together (the Department of Fisheries, the Soufriere Regional Development Foundation SRDF and the conservation organisation CANARI) had the right mix of skills in both the technical issues and those characterising a developing society.  They understood what was necessary for coral reef conservation, successful marine park operation, sustainability of tourism revenues, the future of local fisheries and, in general, for people at the subsistence level.  Also seeing the local tourism business as a development partner to the government institutions was important for the success.
3. In the conflict resolution process the technically less competent and the less powerful parties received assistance.  Thus, it has been easier to them to respect the agreements reached than it would have been if they had not been able to get technical support.  The assistance includes facilitation of access to offshore fishing grounds to the fishermen, who may fish on the reef less than in the past.  Loans which allow the purchase of suitable vessels, outboard engines and deep-water fishing gear are available.  When means of livelihood are taken away from a person, a good rule is to offer compensation.  This rule is being followed by the SMMA.
4. The pragmatic, human-centered approach has contributed to the success.  If a complete biological resource inventory had been done first, the momentum for the MPA development could have been lost. Direct application of scientific justification as a basis for zoning might not have been realistic in the public consultations, in which zoning was mostly a way to settle the existing resource use conflicts.  Related to this, it was stressed by the lead agencies that there was a need to respect the existing uses.  When there was need for intervention, the aim was to interfere as little as possible.  Also in this way the setting up of the SMMA was development with a human face.  Balancing the ecological values with the human needs has been left as a task for the future. Perhaps luckily, the ecologically most diverse coral communities were also the most popular dive sites and many of them were included in the marine reserve zones during the original zoning.
5. The SMMA programme was designed as a self-funding operation (reaching this target during its second year of operation). This could be presented to the government as a no-cost operation. Because the benefits from protection were understood by the decision-makers, they could even see the possibilities for additional income from the protection. After the SMMA had been established, the government started funding the infrastructure of another similar MPA operation, encouraged by the positive SMMA experiences.
6. The government let an independent entity (initially an NGO) administer the management.  As an independent operator needs revenues from the operation, it is dependent on the quality of the operation to keep the paying customers satisfied.  Thus the SMMA has had an incentive to do the management well and keep the marine resources in a good condition.  Related to this, the government agreed that the income from the operation would be deposited on a separate bank account and could be channeled back to the operation directly.  Thus, those in charge of the SMMA can count on managing the funds they have received and are also able to plan the future financially (without being dependent of the state budget).
7. As foreign development financing helped start the operation, there was less financial pressure to cover all the costs when the programme was still in its initial stages and technical problems with boats, signs and mooring buoys requiered attention.  In other similar situations core deposit to a management fund by the financing agency could provide financial stability at the beginning of the programme.
8. The importance of an educational and friendly approach was stressed in the enforcement at the beginning.  This helped the marine park operation get a good start.
9. As the geographic area is limited in scope, population and activities, it has been fairly easy for those involved to understand the problems, opportunities and compromises, because most of the people are familiar with the whole area and personally know many of the other actors. Although there have been communication problems in the programme, communication in a small-scale operation is more simple than in a bigger one. “Small is beautiful” has been true in this case, which may serve as an example of integrated coastal management at an easily manageable scale.
10. Although established structures for review and revision were originally lacking, the SMMA managed to be adaptive.  The restructuring of the SMMA which took place after its first years showed that in spite of the problems, feedback could be successfully channeled back to the operation.  Without this the programme might have collapsed.

Since these initial experiences, the SMMA has continued its operations and additional lessons in marine park management have been learned.  They can be found here:  http://www.smma.org.lc/

Mooring buoys are an essential part of marine park operations. Thanks to the buoys, anchors don't damage the SMMA reefs. Photo (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

When well implemented, protected area management automatically becomes integrated management: institutions have to put aside their sectoral action boundaries and face the fact that nature doesn’t recognise man-made boundaries.  They also have to deal with user issues which have that same complex character;  all parties, including the agencies, need to be flexible and agree on the protection / zoning/ multiple-use rules through conflict resolution negotiations.  The grassroots voices are best heard through bottom up approaches, while the national authorities need to be professional in their top down leadership.

The Discussion Paper “Linking Marine Protected Areas to Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management:  A Review of Theory and Practice” by Biliana Cicin-Sain and Stefano Belfiore of 2003 provides many useful viewpoints on the linkages between marine protected areas and holistic coastal management.

This NOAA and WCPA (World Comission on Protected Areas) -supported document highlights the fact that although marine protected areas (MPAs) can be a useful conservation step as such, we shouldn’t forget the need to incorporate protected areas into a larger conservation framework.  In coastal areas this means integrated coastal zone management (ICZM). Furthermore, we also need to remember that the World Summit on Sustainable Development called for nations to establish networks of MPAs. The most relevant international agreement for MPA development is the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

The Cicin-Sain and Belfiore paper mentions five principles of “sound governance” of protected areas, which are based on the UNDP principles of good governance.  As these original UNDP governance principles are perhaps easier to understand than those cited by the authors, they are listed below:

1. Participation & Concensus orientation
2. Strategic vision, including human development, and historical, cultural and social complexities
3. Responsiveness of institutions and processes to stakeholders & Effectiveness and efficiency
4. Accountability to the public and to institutional stakeholders & Transparency
5. Equity & Rule of Law

Typical for MPA management today is that conservation is not implemented in isolation from real-world economic activities like artisanal fishing.  In the past that was tried – commonly the result was a “paper park”.  As the Cicin-Sain and Belfiore document states, “the challenge, therefore, is not to eliminate these activities, but instead how to manage them in an appropriate manner while preserving essential ecological processes, life support systems and biological diversity”.

As regards the connections of an MPA to its surroundings, the authors mention the need to link all ICZM efforts to watershed planning and river basin management.  If this is not properly done, for example coral reefs will be threatened by sediment runoff from logging areas and construction sites, where topsoil is exposed and washed away during heavy rains.

Other MPA development areas mentioned (based on a CBD / CZMC / RIKZ study) include more emphasis to restoration and rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems and recovery of threatened species.  Also encouragement of customary use of biological resources in harmony with traditional practices is a development area in MPA management.  In addition, the precautionary principle and the ecosystem approach are mentioned as key concepts to be highlighted in MPA development. Emergency response measures are increasingly needed for situations in which MPA biodiversity is under sudden and serious threat.

What uses and activities are threatening our MPAs?  The Cicin-Sain and Belfiore Discussion Paper summarises the threats in the following manner:

Coastal and ocean uses affecting MPAs:

• Navigation and communications (shipping, port and harbour development, navigational aids, communication cables)
• Exploitation of living marine resources
• Mineral and energy resources extraction
• Tourism and recreation
• Coastal infrastructure development
• Pollution and waste disposal
• Military activities
• Research

Inland activities affecting MPAs:

• Agriculture
• Forestry
• Mining
• River diversions, damming, other alterations
• Industrial (point source) waste
• Nonpoint sources of pollution
• Atmospheric deposition of vehicle and powerplant emissions
• Alteration of wetlands
• Construction of human settlements and roads

Marine park management is a constant learning and adaptation process in a changing world. Photo from an Egyptian Red Sea park off Hurghada, (c) 2010 Erkki Siirila.

The good thing is that more than ever the need to control the climate change is understood by the nations. In the final document all the participating countries underline that climate change is a serious environmental problem, which needs to be addressed.

The Copenhagen Accord includes the following elements:

1. The overall goal is that the temperature increase of our planet shouldn´t exceed two degrees Celcius.

2. Both the industrialised and developing countries will present national plans on how to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. These plans needs to be prepared in January 2010.

3. The developing countries will receive fresh climate funds and technology worth 30 billion U.S. dollars for the period 2010-2012. The level of long term annual aid will increase to 100 billion U.S. dollars by the year 2020.

4. The international control of emission cuts will improve. Developing countries need to report once in every two years.

The UN climate negotiations will continue in Mexico in 2010. New, concrete results would benefit the conservation of our coastal and marine ecosystems.

The Red Sea coral reefs remain endangered. Photo (c) 2009 Erkki Siirila.

The calcification rate in the studied areas had diminished by 14.2% since 1990.  This kind of drop in calcification is “unprecedented in at least the past 400 years”.

The authors suggest that temperature stress and declining saturation state of seawater aragonite are diminishing the ability of the Great Barrier Reef corals to deposit calcium carbonate.  If this is really happening, the physical structure of the reefs is in danger to erode away and the whole coral reef ecosystem can be considered endangered.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg from the University of Queensland has presented similar alarming indications of the threats to coral reefs.  He highlighted the dangers of  the increasing atmospheric CO2 levels to coral reefs at the U.S. Center, Copenhagen, in December 2009.  This is the link to the video summary of his presentation:

The research results published five years ago suggest that coral reef calcification rates would not be in decline.  In fact, they are said to be equivalent to those observed more than 200 years ago.

The observations were done at major reef-building colonies around the globe in the Indo-Pacific coral region and in massive Porites (a genus of finger-like stony coral) reef colonies in Australia, Hawaii, Thailand, the Persian Gulf and New Ireland.

The scientists say that the increase in reef calcification is probably due to enhanced coral metabolism and/or increases in photosynthetic rates of the symbiotic algae. The researchers expect the increases in calcification associated with ocean warming outweigh the decreases associated with higher CO2 levels.   “While initially showing a decrease in calcification up to 1964, ocean warming outweighs the CO2 effect and stimulates recovery of coral reef calcification”, says Richard Matear, one of the researchers, at Scienceagogo: 20041112235853data_trunc_sys.shtml

Enjoying a healthy reef of Roatan Island in Honduras. Photo (c) 2009 Erkki Siirila.

Dr. Pavan Sukhdev, a UN specialist in environmental economics, warns us that the cost of destroyed coral reefs would be nearly £600,000 per hectare in some areas. In the whole world, the reef damage, if not controlled, is calculated to lead to the loss of livelihood for 500 million people.