Q 18 - How to identify priority areas for preserving/restoring reef-forming species such as oysters Lanice conchilega or mussels?#
Answers#
Dispersion and connectivity modelling (Dispersion and connectivity modelling)
Pressure assessment of MARine activities (PMAR) module (Dispersion and connectivity modelling)
Trade-off for MPA Design - Conservation and economic development (Trade-off for MPA Design)
Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment (Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment)
ESE1 - Ecological toolkit#
Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation Implementation and management Monitoring and evaluationSpatial scales: Transboundary / sea basin National Regional / localProtection regimes: Strict protection Non-strict protectionMarine zones: Coastal zoneCriteria classes: 1.1.1 Vulnerability 1.1.2 Stability 1.1.3 Functional hotspots 1.1.4. Life cycle critical areas 1.2 Structural 1.4 Ecological status
Criteria
Category Ecological and genetic criteria
Subcategory Functional
Macro-criterion Vulnerability
Criteria Sensitivity
Macro-criterion Stability
Criteria Ecosystem Integrity
Macro-criterion Life cycle critical areas
Criteria Recruitment areas
Macro-criterion Functional hotspots
Subcategory Structural
Subcategory Ecological status
Operational approaches: (Method) Dispersion and connectivity modelling (Tool) Pressure assessment of MARine activities (PMAR) module (Method) Trade-off for MPA Design - Conservation and economic development (Method) Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment
Implementation details
To answer this question, we highly recommend to follow the guidance flow (CAMBRA et al., 2024) which is designed to answer to this type of management question. The core analysis is a sensitivity-based vulnerability assessment and the definition of a portfolio of scenarios. To support the process, for benthic species, a census list of traits of importance, with an already filled matrix for British Isles and the main species of interest including Lanice conchilega and different mussel species, can be found in the Biological Traits Information Catalogue (BIOTIC) (Marine Life Information Network. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2006).
Prioritizing areas depends mostly on indicators of stability, connectivity, presence and abundance (hotspots). It is important to identify productive areas and healthy ecosystems (assess the good status).
The question relates to several criteria from ESE1. Sensitivity for example is very important in this case, with the goal of identifying priority areas for preservation/restoration of reef-forming species, as it is the degree to which a species is influenced by one or more aspects of climate (Dawson et al., 2011) or anthropogenic stressors, with sensitivity directly related to the species’ inner traits and is used in Vulnerability assessments. Other criteria in the Vulnerability and Stability macro-criteria of the ESE1 can be relevant for the answering of this question such as: Traits-based Adaptivity, Resilience/Recovery, Resistance, Species Vulnerability to Climatic and Anthropogenic stressors, Ecosystem Integrity, General Adaptivity and Stability.
Critical life cycle areas macro-criteria includes connectivity related criteria such as larval source and recruitment areas (larval sink areas), which is an important element to be taken into account when seeking to preserve/restore mussels. Abundance hotspots of a functionally important species such as Lanice conchilega strongly relates to the defined criteria of Presence of key functional species and key functional areas (e.g. larval source areas).
The second criteria type, not directly depending on the ecological part, is the feasibility of the protection depending on the intensity and importance of human activities and the possibility to agree to a trade-off decision and ensure monitoring and compliance (cf. ESE3).
For restoration purpose, several guidelines exist that synthetize the best known practices at least for mussels. Performing a review of this guidance to select the most relevant methods regarding local conditions and the development of a dedicated monitoring in the chosen area is highly recommended.
MSPdF Classification: Marine & Coastal Environment -> Ecosystem: Species Marine & Coastal Environment -> Ecosystem: Habitat Ecosystem Services: Regulation & Maintenance (Biotic) - 2.2.3.1 Pest control (including invasive species) Ecosystem Services: Regulation & Maintenance (Biotic) - 2.2.3.2 Disease control Legal, Governance & Planning: Fisheries Legal, Governance & Planning: Aquaculture Legal, Governance & Planning: Conservation (i.e. Protected areas) Legal, Governance & Planning: Strategic - Regional
Notes
Cambra et al (2024). Guidance for including climate change scenarios in protection and prioritization strategies for Marine Protected Areas development. Deliverable D3.3, under the WP3 of MSP4BIO project (GA n°101060707)
Practices: [Not Related to Any Practice]
Measures#
Measures: Fishery - Spatial Approaches/Practices - Mapping habitats Fishery - Spatial Approaches/Practices - Benthic protection areas bottom trawling Offshore renewable energy - Sector-environment - Nature enhancement Marine non-living resources - Annual Reports Using EMS Data - Environmental performance reports Marine non-living resources - Environmental aspects - Means for the returning of a species Marine non-living resources - Environmental aspects - Exclusion zones for sensitive features Aquaculture - General Planning Rules based on - Ecosystem Service Tools Offshore renewable energy - Planning and site selection OWF - Alternative installation methods