Preprint volume - SIBM

Pre-print Volume – Invited presentation
Topic 1: BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION SCIENCE: CONTRIBUTING TO MANAGEMENT
threatened with decline. The tool that closes the gap between the desire to conserve
habitats and having a meaningful classification of marine habitats is the EUNIS
classification (Davies et al., 2004). Identifying which of those habitats should be
protected especially requires survey information to know where they occur and
information on their rarity and likely sensitivity to human activities.
Species. There are very few marine species identified in the Habitats Directive for
protection and OSPAR (the Oslo and Paris Commissions for the Protection of the
Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic) lists only seven limited-mobility
species that were considered threatened (see www.ospar.org). The IUCN Red List
criteria require detailed quantitative data on decline and it is large mobile species that
generally make it onto the lists. In the UK, many species that would be considered as
‘worthy’ of conservation action (because they are most likely long-lived, slow
growing, reproduce infrequently, have limited dispersal powers and are sensitive to
human activities) failed to pass the tests that would make them Biodiversity Action
Plan species (see www.ukbap.org.uk) because the criteria used required quantitative
information on decline (to be compatible with criteria for terrestrial species) and so
‘data deficient’ became a widely ticked box in assessments. Nevertheless, the criteria
for Nationally Important Marine Features (see Hiscock, 2008 for a summary and
Connor et al., 2002 for the full report) successfully identified a significant numbers of
species. However, the list has not been fully used because of incompleteness and
because some of the species listed are considered very obscure and even of dubious
taxonomic status. Another tangible tool that policy advisors and sea users can use is a
list of rare and scarce species and, for Britain, pragmatic measures have been
developed (Sanderson et al., 1996).
Design of a series of marine protected areas - The OSPAR Commission (2006) has
outlined guidance on design principles for the identification of an ‘ecologically
coherent network of MPAs’. Those principles have been adopted and developed to
prepare Ecological Network Guidance for the identification of Marine Conservation
Zones as a part of a network of MPAs in England under recent legislation in the UK
(the Marine and Coastal Access Act, which came into force in November 2009). Those
principles in the UK include:
• Representativity
• Replication
• Viability
• Adequacy
• Connectivity
• Protection
The idea of designing for connectivity between MPAs is a particularly difficult
criterion and its inclusion in marine policy may draw more from the experience of
terrestrial ecologists where wildlife corridors are important than from the knowledge
that marine systems are very ‘open’ and connectivity through the water column is a
general feature. The idea of designing-in connectivity is that separate MPAs will
interact with and support each other to create a ‘network’. OSPAR (2006) note that
“This [an ecologically coherent network] is particularly important for highly mobile
species, such as certain birds, mammals and fish, to safeguard the critical stages and
areas of their life cycle (such as breeding, nursery and feeding areas)”. For species with
41 st S.I.B.M. CONGRESS Rapallo (GE), 7-11 June 2010
26