Time Schedule:
Donald R Gunderson
FISH 513
Seattle Campus
Contemporary problems and issues in management, conservation, and restoration as they relate to fisheries and aquatic sciences.
Class description
Principles of Designing Effective Networks of Marine Protected Areas
Student learning goals
General method of instruction
Assigned readings and class discussions
Recommended preparation
Class assignments and grading
There are 31 assigned papers. In addition to reading each paper prior to class, each student will provide a detailed summary of two of these and lead class discussions on the content and conclusions.
The assigned readings are:
WEEK 1 . None. Background and Current Status of MPA's
WEEK 2. The Context of MPA's in Current Management Systems
Murray et al. 1999. No-take reserve networks: sustaining fishery populations and marine ecosystems. Fisheries 24(11):11-25 Witherell,D, C. Pautzke, and D. Fluharty. 2000. An ecosystem-based approach for Alaska groundfish fisheries. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57:771-77
Soh et al. 2001. The potential role of marine reserves in the management of shortraker rockfish and rougheye rockfish in the Gulf of Alaska. Fish. Bull 99:168-2001
WEEK 3. The Context of MPA's in Current Management Systems (cont.)
Sladek Nowlis. 2000. Short and long-term effects of three fishery management tools on depleted fisheries. Bull. Mar. Sci.66(3):651-662.
Bohnsak. 2000. A comparison of the short-term impact of no-take marine reserves and minimum size limits.Bull. Mar. Sci.66(3):635-650
Hastings and Botsford. 1999. Equivalence in yield from marine reserves and traditional fisheries management. Science.284:1537-1538.
WEEK 4. Design of MPA's: Biological Principles
Allison et al. 1998. Marine reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecol. Appl. 8 (suppl. 1):79-92
Sladek Nowlis and Roberts.1998.Fisheries benefits and optimal design of marine reserves. Fish. Bull. 97:604-616.
Sladek Nowlis and Yoklavich.1998. Design criteria for rockfish harvest refugia from models of fish transport. pp 32-40 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2
Mangel.2000. On the fraction of habitat allocated to marine reserves. Ecol. Letters (3):15-22.
WEEK 5 Design of MPA's: Biological Principles (cont)
Botsford et al. 1999. Marine reserves and management of the northern california red sea urchin fishery. Cal COFI Rep. 40:87-93.
Morgan and Botsford.1998. The influence of larval transport and retention on recruitment patterns and the design of harvest refugia for rockfish. pp 41-49 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2
Warner et al. 2000. Larval accumulation and retention:implications for the design of marine reserves and essential fish habitat. Bull. Mar. Sci.66(3):821-830.
Swearer et al. 1999. Larval retention and recruitment in an island population of a coral-reef fish. Nature. 402:799-802.
Jones et al. 1999. Self-recruitment in a coral reef fish population. Nature. 402:802-804.
WEEK 6. Design of MPA's: Biological Principles (cont)
Larson and Julian.1999. Spatial and temporal genetic patchiness in marine populations and their implications for fisheries management. CalCOFI REp. 40:94-99
Russ and Alcala. 1996. Do marine reserves export adult fish biomass? Evidence from Apo Island, central Phillippines. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 132:1-9.
Crowder et al. 2000. Source-sink population dynamics and the problem of siting marine reserves. Bull. Mar. Sci. 66(3):799-820.
WEEK 7. Design of MPA's: Biological Principles (cont)
Martel et al. The use of marine protected areas for conservation of lingcod. Bull. Mar. Sci. 66(3):729-743.
Stockhausen et al. 2000. Joint effects of larval dispersal, population regulation, marine reserve design, and exploitation on production and recruitment in the Caribbean spiny lobster. Bull. Mar. Sci. 66(3):957-990.
Pauly et al. 2000. Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace as tools for evaluating ecosystem impact of fisheries. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57:697-706.
WEEK 8. Design of MPA's: Policy Considerations
Roberts. 2000. Selecting marine reserve locations:optimality versus opportunism. Bull. Mar. Sci.66(3) 581-592.
Proulx. 1998. The role of law enforcement in the creation and management of marine reserves. pp 74-77 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2.
Bohnsak.1998. Marine reserves:Lessons from Florida. pp 89-99 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2.
Suman. 1998. Stakeholder group perceptions of marine reserves in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. pp 100-112 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2.
WEEK 9. Implementation of MPA's
O'Connell et al. 1998. The use of a no-take marine reserve in the eastern Gulf of Alaska to protect essential fish habitat. pp 125-132 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2.
Murawski et al. 2000. Large-scale closed areas as a fishery management tool in temperate marine systems: the Georges Bank experience. Bull. Mar. Sci. 66(3):775-798.
Pastoors et al. 2000. Effects of a partially closed area in the North Sea ("plaice box") on stock development of plaice. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57:1014-1022.
Pac. Fish. Mgt. Council. 2000.Marine Reserves to supplement management of West Coast groundfish resources. Phase I Technical Analysis. 48pp.
WEEK 10. Implementation of MPA's: Puget Sd. and the San Juan Is.
Palsson.1998. Monitoring the response of rockfishes to protected areas. pp 64-73 IN (M. Yoklavich, ed.) NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-255. Tech. Memo. 2
N.A.
