Science and the MPA's - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

GregAndrew · 05-10-2010, 07:23 PM

Here is a question that no one seems to be able to answer. If 39% of species do better outside of reserves (PISCO Marine Reserves Handbook), then why was the reserve size science based on capturing 90% of the area species? They base their minimum and recommended reserve sizes on capturing 90% of the available species. This creates at least 2 problems: the costs associated with larger reserves than are necessary, and driving the 39% further from where they would want to be.

I would agree that there is a lot of science in the process on both sides, but little of it is being utilized in a scientific way by the powers that be.

05-10-2010, 07:23 PM	#1
GregAndrew Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,384	Here is a question that no one seems to be able to answer. If 39% of species do better outside of reserves (PISCO Marine Reserves Handbook), then why was the reserve size science based on capturing 90% of the area species? They base their minimum and recommended reserve sizes on capturing 90% of the available species. This creates at least 2 problems: the costs associated with larger reserves than are necessary, and driving the 39% further from where they would want to be. I would agree that there is a lot of science in the process on both sides, but little of it is being utilized in a scientific way by the powers that be.