Mar' ERP Slide 1

1
Marine Ecoregional Planning in TNC
2
Development of an Ecoregional Plan for the
northern Gulf of Mexico
Central
Eastern
Western
Goal To identify high priority bays/estuaries
that if protected would represent the diversity
of the Gulf.
3
Framework for Prioritization in No. Gulf of Mexico

• Identify conservation targets-- ecosystems
  spp.
• Collect the available information on targets
• Set conservation goals
• Develop strawman set of priority sites using
• a reserve selection program
• Evaluate these mathematical results in wkshops
• and interviews with scientists managers
• Finalize the portfolio of sites into an
• ecoregional plan

4
Targets Ecosystems Species
Seagrass Fringed pipefish Fresh
Grass Blackfin Goby Oyster reef Longsnout
seahorse Salt marsh Dwarf seahorse Sponge
Coral Opossum pipefish Tidal Fresh
Marsh Texas pipefish Serpulid Reefs Florida
manatee Tidal flats Beaches Kemps
Ridley Intertidal shrub/scrub Gulf
Sturgeon
5
Florida manatee
Trichechus manatus latirostris
6
Species and Ecosystems of the Eastern Gulf
7
Examples of Ecosystem Data (hectares)
8
Selecting sites with algorithms the SITES program

• Program Aims To find minimum set of sites
• that meets user-selected conservation goals
• Two types of Initial Reserve Selection algorithms
• Simulated Annealing and Richness
• Our Aims To provide a strawman set of
• priority bays/estuaries to be analyzed revised
• in scientific workshops

9
Conservation Goals

• A conservation goal is the amount of the
  target(s) that must be preserved to protect
  viable populations and ecosystems that represent
  the full range of the diversity within an
  ecoregion.
• Can be individually set.
• Goal for ecosystems-- 20 of current acreage
• Goal for species-- 20 of known occurrences
• Partly based on fisheries models, spp-area
  curves, landscape theory/connectivity
• See Roberts and Hawkins CINMS Sci. Panel Beck

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Goals Proposed for a Wide Range of Targets Aims
Most studies cited in Roberts and Hawkins. See
Beck in Groves book. TNC marine resources CD. See
CINMS at ppt http//www.cinms.nos.noaa.gov/marine
res/MRWG_SP_ED/ppframe.htm
13
Goals Proposed for Biodiversity Conservation Aims
Sites Author Criteria Area Channel
Islands Sci. Advisory Comm 2002 Representative/Uni
que Habitats 30- 50 Caribbean Pezzey et al.
2000 Representative of Size (gradient) 21-
40 South Africa Turpie et al. 2000 Species
Representation 10-36 Galapagos Bustamante et
al. 1999 Representative habitats 36 New
Zealand Ballantine 1997 Target Specific 10
Most studies cited in Roberts and Hawkins. See
Beck in Groves book. TNC marine resources CD. See
CINMS at ppt http//www.cinms.nos.noaa.gov/marine
res/MRWG_SP_ED/ppframe.htm
14
MARINE ECOREGIONAL PLANNING in the Northwest
Division
Zach A. Ferdaña, The Nature Conservancy Curtis
D. Tanner, U.S. Fish Wildlife Service Michael
W. Beck, Ph.D., The Nature Conservancy Paul Dye,
The Nature Conservancy
15
Sampling/Planning Units
Hexagons Analyzing known species
distributions, or fine filter
Linear Units Analyzing shoreline habitats, or
coarse filter
16
NEARSHORE MARINECOST INDEX

• Nearshore parameters include
• Public and Private Tidelands/Bedlands
• Marine Reserves other protected areas
• Fisheries Closures
• Shoreline modifiers to nearshore costs
• Shoreline Armoring
• Railroads in the high intertidal
• Public and Private boat ramps
• Commercial and Ferry routes

All cost parameters were averaged within
shoreline segments and hexagon planning units
17
Tier 2b
Run 2 - Rockfish species, Lingcod, Rocky Reef (94
units)
18
Tier 3
Run 3 - Seabirds and Marine Mammals (193 units)
19
Tier 3b
Run 4 - Invertebrates to fulfill all species and
habitat goals (357 units)
20
Tier 4
Ten Seascape sites, five in Puget Trough, five in
Georgia Basin
21
Integrating Terrestrial, Freshwater Marine
Priority Areas in the Puget Trough Before
Integration
22
Integrating Terrestrial, Freshwater Marine
Priority Areas in the Puget Trough After
Integration
23
Dead Zone
24
(No Transcript)
25
Potential Restoration Areas From Central
Tallgrass Prairie
Legend
Conservation Areas
Restoration Areas
26
(No Transcript)
27
Identifying Offshore Ecotypes (Ecosystems)
28
Status of Coastal Marine Plans
Completed
In Progress or in Prep.
Imminent or Ongoing Bahamas Gulf of
California Bay of Fundy Lesser Antilles Pan-Caribb
ean EPU Humboldtian Pacific Coast Desert
EPU Atacama/Sechura Papua SE Asia Coral
Triangle Hawaii all islands marine Polynesia Mic
ronesia Some Marine Planners Ferdana, Dye,
Couv-- NW Merrifield, Mayer, Cook- CA Beck,
Karr Calderon, Atkinson- Pacific Caribbean Planner
29
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional Planning Aims

• Be clear on aims at all times
• These are not MPA plansrepeat early and
  often
• TNC identifies minimum areas for biodiversity
  representation
• preservation
• These are not plans for sustainable fisheries
• Only include fished species as targets
• - Fished species are imperiled
• - Fishing impairs ecosystem integrity by reducing
  fish pops
• (if fishing is a threat, this is identified at
  other plan stages)
• Extent of coastal plans should be to
  continental shelf or
• boundary currents (e.g., CA or Humboldt)

30
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Targets

• Identify targets quickly, focus on ecosystems
  use fewer spp.
• Generally include species if they are imperiled
  or keystone
• For keystone species use definition from Power
  et al.
• Include aggregations and convergences (e.g.,
  upwelling)
• In offshore areas identify EMUs (surrogate for
  ecosystem)
• Dont have more EMUs than there are likely
  ecosystems

31
The fine filter list is only for
species/types that cant get represented by
coarse filter (ecosystem) targets. We represent
each ecosystem in the priority areas to
ultimately represent the diversity that occurs
within each ecosystem. (1). Develop a Secondary
Target List first and put all potential fine
filter targets on this list. (2) Elevate fine
filter targets to the Primary Target List when
these will not be covered by representing the
ecosystems in which they occur. i.e., species is
imperiled, keystone, or an ecosystem engineer
(see Lawton), or otherwise has a major impact on
the structure and function of communities. (3) Be
critical. Every fine filter target weights the
plan towards a few species and away from most
biodiversity. Each new species target means more
work in data collection, analysis, write-up and
implementation. (4) Do Not Add Species Targets
just because they are Overfished. This is a
biodiversity not a fisheries sustainability plan.
Add a fished species if it is ecologically
imperiled (this is rare) or its reduction in
numbers critically degrades ecosystems. (5) If
you add a species because you think its loss
alters community structure and function, be
prepared with a clear argument/hypothesis of
these likely effects. Hard evidence is not
required, but it demands a defensible rationale
beyond some fish feed on it and it feeds on
other fish so its reduction must have food web
repercussions --these trophic interactions are
notoriously difficult to document in marine
systems. ( 6 ) Targets that do not meet the above
criteria may remain on (or be dropped from)
Secondary Targets list. Site selection models/
workshops are initially run on the primary
targets only. After draft sites are selected
based on primary targets, ask if the sites
sufficiently cover the Secondary Targets. If not,
then the sites may require some revision.
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Targets-- Further Advice for Fine Filter
Target Selection
32
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional Planning Data

• Look for data that covers at least entire
  subregions
• Whenever possible - get historical data

33
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional Planning Goals

• Currently 20 for common types
• 30 for more uncommon or heavily impacted
  ecosystems
• For rare species and types -no specific
  numbers-- can go up to 100

34
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Selecting Sites

• Look for low hanging fruit (stop picking the
  battle scenes)
• Look carefully at existing sites we dont use
  them effectively
• Use SITES or Marxan
• Identify planning units so that there are at
  least 5-10 units within any likely site (e.g.,
  estuary/reef) to be chosen
• Use programs to develop strawmen to be
  evaluated in expert workshops.
• Change results when credible ecological reasons
  can be recorded

35
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Assessing Viability

• True viability will be difficult to assess.
• If PVAs exist-- use them
• Use cost factors in Marxan as a screen for
  likely viability

36
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Implementation

• Involve partners earlyuse ERP as a strategy
• As part of plan assess multi-site threats and
  strategies
• Plan to publish (now part of TNC standard)
• Make data available (within constraints)
• Bring on your lead implementer before
  completion of plan

37
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Resources

• TNC Marine Resources CD
• Resources-- Beck chapter, CD, Beck and Odaya,
• Puget five-pager, Sala paper, CINMS ppt, Power
  paper (keystone)

38
(No Transcript)
39
Issues to Be Addressed

• Targets
• Data - Present historical
• Goals - 20 for common 30 for rarer
• Timing
• Planning Units
• Stratification
• Cost factors
• Integration with other plans-- e.g., Ches.,
  Greater Caribbean
• Integration across terrestrial, freshwater and
  marine
• Offshore extent of plan
• Possible offshore models
• Thinking to future-- e.g., climate change
• Role of team members
• Marine ERP workshop

40
Some Advice for Marine Ecoregional
Planning Resilience
Resilience Advice from Done et al. MPA
practitioners should consider the process of
initial identification of prospective reefs for
inclusion as a risk-spreading process, where
identified sites have an enhanced chance of being
bleaching resistant, rather than one that will
insure that each identified site will be
bleaching resistant Aim for a comprehensive
representation of coral reef biodiversity in the
ecoregion of interest by subdividing the coral
communities along and across it into a number
of classes, and/or reef types and habitats. If
possible, acquire satellite SST maps for known
bleaching years, and identify those places that
were cooler i.e. in the lower quartile of
summertime three daymaximum SST - as places most
likely to escape heating anomalies in future.
Field assessments of bleaching impact, should
they exist, may suggest a subdivision of SST that
is narrower or broader that a quartile. Within
these lower quartiles, select reefs that include
replicated representation of all the classes of
coral reef biodiversity that have been defined
for the ecoregion. A systematic representation
across continental shelves at various latitudes
should also serve this purpose. There may be
cases where not all classes of biodiversity are
represented in what were the cooler areas in
past events. Then look to longer term data or
local knowledge to seek to include that missing
biodiversity by identification of some reefs
areas that in the longer term have been in
relatively warm waters for that part of the world
(e.g. in shallow waters poor currents), and some
in relatively cooler waters (in deeper
waters stronger currents). In the absence of
any environmental data at all, a systematic
representation across continental shelves at
various latitudes will be the best strategy, but
it may require a greater number of protected
areas to ensure a given number are actually
bleaching resistant.
41
Advice for Goal Setting Currently 20 for common
types, 30for more limited or impacted
ecosystems, for rare species and types -no
specific numbers-- can go up to 1006 From
Roberts Hawkins-- most categories on
fishing Objective Biodiversity
representation Turpie et al. 2000 Divided the
South African coast into fifty two 50km sections
to explore designs for systems of marine reserves
that would represent all species of marine fish
present, and all biogeographic areas. Analyses of
complementarity were used to design the most
space-efficient systems of reserves. A
system covering 10 of the coast could be
designed that would represent 97.5 of the
species. However, this would not represent 15
narrowly distributed species found only in South
Africa. A reserve system covering 29 of the
coast would represent all of the species.
Representing all species in the core regions of
their ranges, a commonly-stated conservation goal
that aims to maximize the chances of populations
persisting in the longterm, would require 36 of
the coast to be protected. Bustamante et al.
1999 Developed a design for a representative
system of fully-protected zones for
coastal habitats in the Galapagos Marine Reserve.
This reserve covers the entire archipelago. Their
objectives were to protect all of the tourism
visiting sites in the archipelago, all areas of
high biological importance, and to represent all
the different coastal habitat types in each of
the five biogeographic zones encompassed by
the islands. To achieve this, they calculated it
would be necessary to protect 36 of the
coastline from fishing. Halfpenny and Roberts in
press Designed a reserve system for the
continental shelf seas of north-western Europe
which aimed to represent all habitats and
biogeographic regions present, and to replicate
them in different reserves. Two systems covering
10 of the region were designed and were
successful in achieving sufficient replication
for most, but not all of the biogeographic
regions and habitats. Objective Increase
connectivity among reserves Roberts in press d
Used a simple model in which reserve size and the
fraction of the management area covered by
reserves were varied to explore levels of
connectivity among reserves. Connectivity
rapidly increased (as measured by decreasing
inter-reserve distances) as the proportion
protected increased. For any given reserve
proportion, connectivity also increased as the
size of individual reserves was
decreased. Connectivity increases were
asymptotic, with the greatest decreases in
inter-reserve distance manifested over the range
of 5-30 of the management area protected.
Reserves got 76 closer to each other over
this range of protection. He also examined
connectivity as the target size of reserves for
dispersing offspring, expressed as the number of
degrees of horizon covered by reserves. Target
size increased steeply as the proportion of the
management area protected grew, and was four
times greater at 30 of the area in
reserves compared to 5. GET WARNER pub from
Channel Islands
42
(No Transcript)
43
Identifying Offshore Ecotypes (Ecosystems)
44
Identifying Offshore Ecotypes (Ecosystems)
45
Florida manatee
Trichechus manatus latirostris
46
Gulf Sturgeon
Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi
47
Seagrass Ecosystem
48
Carolinian and West Indian Targets
Seagrass Atlantic sturgeon Intertidal
marshes Green Sea Turtle Oyster
reef Staghorn Coral Salt marsh Johnsons
seagrass Coral reefs Elkhorn Coral Tidal
fresh marsh Mangrove Rivulus Dunes Florida
manatee Tidal flats beaches Smalltooth
Sawfish Tidal Creeks Blue Shiner
49
TNC Priority Sites in Completed Ecoregional Plans
For Internal Use Only-- 8/00
50
MARINE ECOREGIONAL PLANNING in the Northwest
Division
Zach A. Ferdaña, The Nature Conservancy Curtis
D. Tanner, U.S. Fish Wildlife Service Michael
W. Beck, Ph.D., The Nature Conservancy Paul Dye,
The Nature Conservancy
51
Marine Conservation TargetsCoarse Filter Fine
Filter

• Shoreline types (9) and
• Biological modifiers (3)
• Total shoreline targets (39 stratified into two
  sections)
• Rocky Reef habitat -1
• Total habitat targets - 40

• Marine Fish - 17
• Marine Mammals - 8
• Seabirds - 35
• Invertebrates - 23
• Intertidal Vegetation - 11
• Total species targets - 94

Percent of 134 targets with spatial
data Washington 103 targets, or 77 British
Columbia 96 targets, or 72
52
SPECIES AND ROCKY REEF DATA COLLECTION AND
INTEGRATION Survey data was compiled into
Marine Element Occurrences and populated into
hexagon planning units. This was done for marine
fish, seabirds, marine mammals, invertebrate, and
rocky reef data
Raw survey data
Aggregated Marine EOs
Hexagon planning units
53
30 Goal
(Meters)

• Goals higher for shoreline types with
  co-occurrence
• of vegetation targets
• 30 goal factored in known losses of targets
• and missing distribution data

54

• PORTFOLIO CONSTRUCTION
• A combined Analytic and Delphic Approach
• Tier 1 Expert identified priority sites.
• Tier 2 Additional sites based on Forage Fish
  Spawning Grounds, Lingcod, Rockfish species and
  Rocky Reefs
• Tier 3 Additional sites based on targets in
  Tier 2 plus Seabirds and Colonies, Marine
  Mammals and Haulouts, and Invertebrates
• Tiers 4 and 5 Expert Review and Workshop
  information that supports analyses and fills
  data gaps data from the Pelagic Zone

55
Tier 2
Run 1 - Forage Fish spawning grounds (49 units)
56
Bathymetry
57
1o Productivity Chlorophyll a Charleston
58
Stresses to Gulf of Mexico Conservation Targets

• Nutrification
• Altered water chemistry, e.g., salinity
• Altered hydrologic regime- freshwater
• Altered flow regime (docks, seawalls, jetties)
• Altered sedimentation regime (dams)
• Sea-level rise
• Light attenuation (algal blooms, docks)
• Inflow of contaminants and pollutants
• Altered population abundance (overfishing)
• Direct target destruction (dredging, invasives,
• incompatible development, prop scarring)