Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T08:44:38.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Seahorses helped drive creation of marine protected areas, so what did these protected areas do for the seahorses?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2012

M. YASUÉ*
Affiliation:
Quest University Canada, 3200 University Boulevard, Squamish, British Columbia, Canada V8B 0N8 Project Seahorse, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4
A. NELLAS
Affiliation:
Project Seahorse Foundation for Marine Conservation, Gaviola Compound, Maria Theresa Village II, Barangay Guadalupe, Cebu City 6000, Philippines
A. C. J. VINCENT
Affiliation:
Project Seahorse, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4
*
*Correspondence: Dr M. Yasué Tel: +1 604 898 8034 Fax: +1 604 815 0829 e-mail: maiyasue@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In marine environments, charismatic or economically valued taxa have been used as flagships to garner local support or international funds for the establishment and management of marine protected areas (MPAs). Seahorses (Hippocampus spp.) are frequently used as flagship species to help engender support for the creation of small community-managed no-take MPAs in the central Philippines. It is thus vital to determine whether such MPAs actually have an effect on seahorse abundance, reproductive status and size. A survey of seahorses inside and immediately adjacent to eight MPAs, and in four distant unprotected fishing areas, showed these MPAs had no significant effect on seahorse densities; although densities in and near MPAs were higher than in the distant fished sites, seahorse densities did not change over time. Seahorse size did show a marginal reserve effect, with slightly larger seahorses being found inside MPAs as compared to the distant unprotected fishing areas, but, in general, MPAs had little impact on seahorse size. Although MPAs may eliminate local fishing pressure, they may not reduce other threats such as pollution or destructive fishing outside the reserves. Other recovery tools, such as ecosystem-based management, habitat restoration and limits on destructive fishing outside of MPAs, may be necessary to rebuild seahorse populations. The effects of MPAs depend on species, as well as conditions outside the reserve boundaries. MPA management objectives must thus be clearly and realistically articulated to the communities, especially if support for an MPA was derived at least partly to conserve a particular flagship species.

Information

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2012
Figure 0

Figure 1 Map of the marine protected areas (MPAs) and fishing areas in the Danajon Bank, central Philippines.

Figure 1

Table 1 Characteristics of the community-based marine protected areas (MPAs) in which seahorse (SH) surveys were conducted. Habitats: CR = coral reef, SG = seagrass, M = mangrove. A Date is the official establishment date from the MPA's municipal ordinances. B Julian years where zero denotes the year in which the MPA was established and a negative value denotes the number of years prior to MPA designation that survey was conducted. C Data obtained from interviews with field staff who conducted the biological surveys and/or helped establish the reserve; Y = yes, N = no. D Coastal Conservation Environment Fund (CCEF) score is a management rating scheme based on 38 survey questions that assess enforcement, monitoring, local community participation, planning and economic viability of the MPA. According to this rating system, a score of 20–25 indicates ‘enforced’ and good management, 25–30 indicates ‘sustained’ and very good management, and > 30 points indicates ‘institutionalized’ and excellent management. Key informants indicate whether or not the protected area meets a specific management effectiveness criterion. The maximum score is 38 (see White et al. 2006).

Figure 2

Table 2 The minimum adequate models (MAM) predicting seahorse densities in seven marine protected areas (MPAs). The initial model included the fixed effects of: ‘treatment’ (inside MPA, near fished, distant fished), season (wet and dry), years since MPA establishment (Julian years) and the random effect of year, as well as the interaction terms of the fixed effects. Model parameters are based on the MAM and restricted maximum likelihood estimation criterion. Dry season and inside MPA were comparison groups. Consequently, for example, a positive value of β for near MPA sites (‘near’) indicates that the sites near MPAs had greater densities of seahorses than sites inside MPAs, whereas the converse would be true for negative values of β. Shown are the significance values for the increase in deviance if each variable is removed from the model. None of the variables was a significant predictor of seahorse density in Pandanon.

Figure 3

Figure 2 Seahorse densities across sites, season, treatment and years of protection from (a) Batasan, (b) Bantigian and (c) Jandayan Norte. We selected these three sites because they all had high enforcement and management ratings (see Table 1) and because we collected data from these sites soon after the MPA was established.

Figure 4

Table 3 Parameters and significant values for minimum adequate models (MAM) for mixed effects models predicting seahorse height (cm). Dry season and inside marine protected areas (MPAs) were used as comparison groups. *For the aggregated analysis with all MPA sites, we did not include distant fished sites.

Figure 5

Figure 3 The effects of years of protection and season on seahorse height (cm) for (a) dry and (b) wet seasons. Aggregated data from all study sites.