Fernandes, Leanne, Day, Jon, Lewis, Adam, Slegers, Suzanne, Kerrigan, Brigid, Breen, Dan, Cameron, Darren, Jago, Belinda, Hall, James, Lowe, Dave, Innes, James, Tanzer, John, Chadwick, Virginia, Thompson, Leanne, Gorman, Kerrie, Simmons, Mark, Barnett, Bryony, Sampson, Kirsti, De'ath, Glenn, Mapstone, Bruce, Marsh, Helene, Possingham, Hugh, Ball, Ian, Ward, Trevor, Dobbs, Kirstin, Aumend, James, Slater, Deb, and Stapleton, Kate (2005) Establishing representative no-take areas in the Great Barrier Reef: large-scale implementation of theory on marine protected areas. Conservation Biology, 19 (6). pp. 1733-1744.

PDF (Published Version) Restricted to Repository staff only

 

442

9

Abstract

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, an area almost the size of Japan, has a new network of no-take areas that significantly improves the protection of biodiversity. The new marine park zoning implements, in a quantitative manner, many of the theoretical design principles discussed in the literature. For example, the new network of no-take areas has at least 20% protection per “bioregion,” minimum levels of protection for all known habitats and special or unique features, and minimum sizes for no-take areas of at least 10 or 20 km across at the smallest diameter. Overall, more than 33% of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is now in no-take areas (previously 4.5%). The steps taken leading to this outcome were to clarify to the interested public why the existing level of protection was inadequate; detail the conservation objectives of establishing new no-take areas; work with relevant and independent experts to define, and contribute to, the best scientific process to deliver on the objectives; describe the biodiversity (e.g., map bioregions); define operational principles needed to achieve the objectives; invite community input on all of the above; gather and layer the data gathered in round-table discussions; report the degree of achievement of principles for various options of no-take areas; and determine how to address negative impacts. Some of the key success factors in this case have global relevance and include focusing initial communication on the problem to be addressed; applying the precautionary principle; using independent experts; facilitating input to decision making; conducting extensive and participatory consultation; having an existing marine park that encompassed much of the ecosystem; having legislative power under federal law; developing high-level support; ensuring agency priority and ownership; and being able to address the issue of displaced fishers.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page