It’s just been announced that the UK government has created a Marine Protection Area around the Chagos Islands, making it the world’s largest marine reserve.
1/04/2010
The new MPA protects an area of around 544,000 sq kms containing the Indian Ocean archipelago regarded as one of the world’s richest marine ecosystems.
This is a no take zone, meaning fishing, the collection of marine organisms (including corals), and hunting wildlife will be banned within the protected zone.
Although this is a positive step forward for marine conservation it’s not without controversy.
The military base at Diego Garcia is excluded from the MPA, the base is certainly a source of pollution to the local waters and has the potential to be a major polluter in the event of any mishap involving refuelling of ships.
From a human rights point of view this could have a negative affect on the Chagossians, the original inhabitants of the archipelago, who were evicted from Chagos between 1967 and 1971 to allow for the US Air Force base on the largest island, Diego Garcia. The islanders have fought a long battle in both the UK and EU courts for the right to return and consider that the creation of the reserve may have the effect of banning them from returning as, if allowed to return, they would not be able to return to fishing, previously their main source of subsistence and income.
From a personal, and a humanitarian, point of view, I’d like to see the Chagossians returning to the archipelago and being tasked with the management of the MPA. There’s plenty of evidence out their that projects such as this one are more successful when the local population is involved.
U.S. Considers Endangered Species Protection for 82 Stony Coral Species.
I’ve included the full NMFS document at the beginning of the article so that you can see the extent of the proposal. This is followed by a discussion about what the proposal may mean for the aquarium industry.
National Marine Fisheries Service Sets Deadline for Public and Expert Input on Petition to List 82 Stony Coral Species Under the Endangered Species Act.
From the Federal Register (Vol. 75, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 10, 2010)
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Notice of 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List 83 Species of Corals as Threatened or Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.
ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request for information.
SUMMARY: We (NMFS) announce a 90- day finding on a petition to list 83 species of corals as threatened or endangered under the ESA. We find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted for 82 species; we find that the petition fails to present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted for Oculina varicosa. Therefore, we initiate status reviews of 82 species of corals to determine if listing under the ESA is warranted. To ensure these status reviews are comprehensive, we solicit scientific and commercial information regarding these coral species.
DATES: Information and comments must be submitted to NMFS by April 12, 2010.
Eight of the petitioned species are in the Caribbean and belong to the following families: Agaricidae (1); Faviidae (3); Meandrinidae (2); Mussidae (1); Oculinidae (1).
The petition states that all of these species are classified as vulnerable (76 species), endangered (six species: Acropora rudis, Anacropora spinosa, Montipora dilatata, Montastraea annularis, M. faveolata, Millepora tuberosa), or critically endangered (one species: Porites pukoensis) by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). Montipora dilatata and Oculina varicosa are also on our Species of Concern list.
So what does this mean for the aquarium industry?
This petition came about as result of move by the Center for Biological Diversity, Tucson, Arizona, a not for profit conservation organisation.
The move to include these species on the Endangered Species list may well endanger the aquarium usage of stony corals. Amongst the corals listed are a number of common aquarium species, including the currently popular Acanthastrea species along with Euphyllia species, Galaxea, multiple Pavona and Turbinaria species, plus many Acropora species. Although there are corals listed that are undoubtedly endangered there are also other resilient species mentioned that I wouldn’t have expected to see on such a list. It’s worth noting that Caribbean stony corals are already restricted, hence unavailable to the aquarium trade.
To see the position of the Center for Biological Diversity on this issue:
If the petition succeeds it would mean the banning of the collection of the listed species of stony coral from U.S. waters along with a ban on the import of these species into the United States. Obviously this would have an enormous affect on the US aquarium hobby.
There would most likely be a knock on affect to the UK and European market as some of our corals are collected from US waters around the world.
I would expect to see opposition to this petition from exporters, Â particularly from non-US waters, on economic grounds i.e. the income that the coral trade brings into the local economy, and from the aquarium trade. So far the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), a US, not for profit organisation promoting responsible pet ownership and animal welfare, has raised concerns about this issue. In Europe the Sustainable Aquarium Industry Association (SAIA) is also looking at this petition.
It’s interesting to note that some coral reef scientists have also raised concerns about how this would affect their work.
Reef scientist John Bruno, of the University of North Carolina, has started to take a close look at the petition, and, finds some of the assertions made in the petition to be questionable.
To see the views of a respected reef scientist go to: Climate Shifts.org
The NMFS, the NOAA, and the Department of Commerce have opened a 90-day finding period seeking to hear “scientific and commercial information” on whether the list of stony coral species should be given protection under the Endangered Species Act. The consultation process closes 12 April 2010.
Is this the beginning of the end for stony corals in the reef aquarium hobby?
It’s too early to tell how this will turn out but I’ve been predicting this sort of thing happening for a number of years now. As the oceans continue to deteriorate from the effect of climate change and other anthropogenic pressures, the number of Marine Protected Areas and no-take areas will increase in an effort to preserve what’s left; it seems inevitable that this will result in increasing restrictions on collection for the aquarium industry.
Most likely there enough specimens of stony coral in captivity to provide a sustainable captive trade, it’s when it comes to fishes that the hobby will be in real trouble.
One of the world’s largest coral atolls which, surprisingly, belongs to Britain, may soon become the biggest Marine Protected Area (MPA) on Earth.
A three-month public consultation is underway to persuade the UK government to protect the Chagos Archipelago, a group of 55 tropical British islands, in the middle of the Indian Ocean.
This week the 10,000th person signed up in support of the campaign.
The Chagos Environment Network (CEN) who put forward the proposal to protect the giant reef, which is twice the size of Britain, 544,000 sq km area, and boasts the cleanest seawater ever recorded on Earth.
The Chagos contain some of the world’s healthiest coral reefs and the world’s largest surviving coral atoll. It is home to over 220 coral species and 1000 fish species, including the endemic Chagos clownfish, Amphiprion chagosensis.
The pollutant levels in Chagos waters are exceptionally low. Analyses in 1996 suggested that the marine environment of the Chagos Archipelago as a whole is exceptionally pristine, and that it was the cleanest water tested in the world at that time.
In addition the Chagos is a breeding ground and refuge for important populations of sharks, dolphins, marine turtles, and other vulnerable marine and island species.
The area includes deep-sea habitats including 6000 m deep trenches, oceanic ridges, and seamounts, each harbouring specially adapted species. Despite a Fisheries Conservation Management Zone with commercial catches limited by licence, legal and illegal fishing has impacted the area. Sharks, sea cucumbers, turtles, and fish are all known to have declined as a result of illegal fishing and the by-catch from legal fishing. Protecting this area would contribute to a richer Indian Ocean, benefiting people living in and around it
This is one of the best quality reefs remaining on the planet and, from a reef science perspective, it provides a good comparison to reefs damaged by climate change, rising sea temperatures, and other anthropogenic factors. The Chagos Archipelago is an area comparable in importance to better known areas such as the Galapagos or the Great Barrier Reef.
The Chagos Environment Network (CEN) is a collaboration of nine conservation and scientific organisations: The Chagos Conservation Trust, The Linnean Society of London, The Marine Conservation Society, The Pew Environment Group, The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, The Royal Society, The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Zoological Society of London, and Professor Charles Sheppard of Warwick University.
The consultation, ends on 12th February, and examines three options for protection:
A full, no-take, marine reserve for the entire territory.
A marine reserve of the same size that allows some seasonal deep-sea fishing in certain zones.
No-take reserves protecting only the vulnerable reef systems.
The Moral Dilemma.
Unfortunately creating this MPA is not as straightforward as might be hoped, owing to the ongoing court case brought by relocated Chagossians at the European Court of Human Rights, which is expected to be decided later this year.
Between 1967 and 1971 the entire population of the Chagos islands, numbering around 2,000 people, was evicted from the archipelago to make way for the Diego Garcia military base. The islanders were forcibly relocated to Mauritius and the Seychelles, where many have lived in poverty ever since.
In 2008 the islanders lost a long-running battle with the British government when the House of Lords, the final court of appeal in the UK, overturned High Court rulings that had repeatedly found in favour of the Chagossians. Whereas the High Court found that the Chagossians, as British dependent Citizens, had been unlawfully dispossessed and ordered that they be allowed to return to their home, the House of Lords overturned this ruling in favour of the British government.
The Guardian, a UK newspaper, recently reported that Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour MP chairing the all-party parliamentary group for the Chagos islands, said he was “concerned” that the marine protection consultation had not sought the views of exiled islanders. “The Foreign and Commonwealth Office is completely at variance with UK marine conservation policy that seeks to involve the local community,” he said.
Corbyn also said there was concern among Chagos island groups over media reports that portrayed their return as a negative for the environment, that would mean the construction of an airport and town and increasing tourism.
“You will get a small number of people living [in the Chagos] who will support sustainable fishing and ecotourism. If the ‘ultras’ in the marine reserve brigade get their way they will have to have people there to protect the environment. It’s extraordinary that islanders are not trusted but the marine community is. Wealthy people land there in yachts and stay on the islands all time. They are trusted but the islanders are not. I find it patronising and extraordinary.”
It’s Your Decision.
This is not a simple clear-cut subject. As a marine aquarist I’m in favour of the MPA, given the deteriorating state of reefs around the world conserving the Chagos would be a great step forward. I’m particularly interested in the idea that it could be used as a comparative instrument against which the health of other reefs could be measured.
I do however have sympathy with the Chagossians, who I believe have been badly mistreated by the British Government, I also find myself a little uneasy with the idea of an area where access might be restricted to scientists alone. Everywhere else in the world, wherever reef conservation is carried, out it’s considered good practice to get local people involved as much as possible.
There is an alternative to just signing up to the www.protectchagos.org proposal, if you go to http://www.marineeducationtrust.org/petition/protect-chagos you’ll find a petition organised by the Marine Education Trust that is in favour of the MPA, urging the Foreign Secretary to work with the Chagos islanders and the Government of Mauritius to devise an MPA solution that makes provision for resettlement and that protects Mauritius’ legitimate interests.
To find out more about the various issues, in addition to the previously mentioned links, take a look at the following:
Also take a look at, “Stealing a Nation”, the John Pilger documentary, winner of the 2005 Royal Television Society Award, that tells the story of the expulsion of the entire population of the Chagos islands.
If you do decide that you’d like to add your support to the proposed MPA, visit: http://www.marineeducationtrust.org/petition/protect-chagos or www.protectchagos.org, according to your conscience, before the February 12th 2010 deadline, to register your support for the creation of a Chagos no-take Marine Protected Area.
By the way, my conscience moved to me to sign the Marine Education Trust petition.
