Whatever Happened to Marine Reserves in The Bahamas?

by Larry Smith

We are more than halfway through the second closed season for Nassau grouper, and reports are mixed about the ban’s effectiveness.

“We’ve heard that roe and grouper are being sold under the table at local markets, and some restaurants are still offering grouper even though they were asked to take it off the menu for just these few weeks,” Sir Nicholas Nuttall said recently.

Sir Nick set up the Bahamas Reef Environment Educational Foundation back in 1994 and has been a tireless promoter of marine conservation ever since. He was one of the architects of the ban on grouper fishing during the critical winter spawning season.

Nassau grouper is commercially extinct throughout the Caribbean and its survival here is threatened by overfishing. When the fish congregate to breed at specific locations during the winter, they are easy targets. In fact, we were the first country to protect grouper spawning aggregations when the sites off High Cay, Andros were declared off limits in 1998.

Last winter, after years of lobbying by conservationists and fishery managers, the government made it illegal to capture, buy or sell grouper from mid-December to mid-February. And that general ban was re-imposed this season. According to Fisheries Director Michael Braynen, “we have to control fishing now so that there can be fishing in the future.”

Which leads to the question of what has happened to the much-publicised, five-year-old decision to set up a network of marine reserves throughout the country to protect our fishery resources?

In 2000 the Ingraham government agreed in principle to set aside 20 per cent of our 100,000 square miles of ocean as a network of no-take reserves – heeding the best advice of marine scientists worldwide.

The intention was to create five reserves immediately – at Bimini, the Berry Islands, Abaco, South Eleuthera and Exuma – and for the past several years the Department of Fisheries has been consulting with local communities. But this is a daunting task since family islanders regard their fishing grounds as generation property.

“The proposed reserves are not legal entities and precise boundaries were never determined,” Mr Braynen told Tough Call recently. “We have been trying to firm up the government’s commitment, but it is a difficult and time-consuming process.”

In addition to technical research, dozens of meetings have been held with fishermen and civic leaders throughout the islands. The results have now been distilled into a 58-page document that should be submitted to Cabinet within a month or so.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

“The big question is, who will be responsible for management of these areas,” Mr Braynen said. “The Department of Fisheries would need a lot more staff and equipment. And a new entity would require even more money. We have to look at international funding sources like the United Nations Environment Programme.”

A marine reserve is not the same as a national park. Experts say fisheries protection requires a complete ban on any kind of use, including recreational diving, so locating areas with all the right characteristics that are acceptable to competing interests is tricky. But there is no question that this is the way to go if we want to maintain even a semblance of the lifestyle we enjoy today.

Today, there are few areas of the ocean that are beyond the reach of modern technology. That’s why scientists are urging countries to implement large-scale networks of reserves as the best way to halt the dramatic decline of global fisheries.

And that’s no exaggeration. Experts say only a fraction of large predatory commercial fish like tuna are left in the sea after a half century of industrialised fishing. Many traditional fisheries have been wiped out and about three quarters of all marine stocks are now fully exploited, overexploited or depleted.

There are growing concerns, too, about the health of entire ocean ecosystems - the complex web of plants and animals interacting in their associated non-living environment. In the Bahamas, coastal development can destroy mangrove wetlands (which act as fish nurseries) and pollute nearshore reefs, where adult fish live.

Overfishing is eliminating spawning aggregations of groupers while slow-moving conch are under heavy pressure in shallow waters, with more and more juveniles being caught. Since these are the favourite foods of most Bahamians, protecting them makes good sense.

And even migratory species, such as the tuna and billfish that are key features of our sportfishing industry, could benefit from reserves in areas where they are highly vulnerable, such as nursery grounds or aggregation sites.

The best approach – experts say - is to control destructive fishing methods like longlining, legislate closed seasons and size limits, and create a network of reserves. Inside reserves, populations expand and individuals live longer, grow larger and reproduce more; while eggs, larvae and fish spill over into unprotected areas.

In fact, reserves are said to be most effective for small-scale tropical fisheries like those in the Bahamas – even for more mobile species like lobster. Scientists have calculated that the benefits develop within two to five years after establishment of the reserves and continue to build for decades.

The Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park – which became a no-take zone in 1986 – is a good example. It now holds thriving populations of fish, conch and lobster that are expanding to areas outside the park. For example, groupers tagged in the park have been found 150 miles away. And scientists estimate that the population density of animals within a reserve is three times higher than in unprotected areas while their average weight is four times higher.

So there is no argument about the benefits. Experts say each major island in the Bahamas should have at least one nearby marine reserve to act as a fishery replenishment zone. Predictably, most of the opposition falls into the category of “not in my back yard.”

“Politicians are naturally concerned about popular opinion,” said Mike Braynen. “And opinion can vary widely even on small islands. In Abaco, for example, one party threatened to dynamite the reef if we picked a particular site. In Bimini, opinions for and against seem to change every time you ask. In Exuma there is strong opposition to any reserve around Lee Stocking Island and we have had to look at more outlying areas.”

That’s why some are calling for a more muscular top-down approach by the government. After years of consultation and dithering, hard decisions must be made, they argue. The results may not be perfect, but it will be better than doing nothing.

The two-month grouper closure is an example. Clearly this ban is only partly effective, but many fishermen have stopped targeting grouper and some restaurants have taken it off their menus temporarily. And it is anticipated that a regular season will soon be enshrined in fishery regulations, with penalties for commercial entities that don’t comply.

But there’s still the big question of enforcement. There should be no boat anchoring in a reserve and fishing, dredging, diving or otherwise disturbing marine life and habitats will be prohibited. At present, the Defence Force is our only agency with significant maritime capabilities, but when its patrol craft are actually operating they are fully occupied with the fight against illegal immigrants.

In New Zealand, reserves are often protected by honorary rangers (in addition to police and fisheries officers) and managed by local councils. But the fishermen and communities have to buy in to the concept for it to be effective. And that often means finding the right incentives. Currently, the only incentive here is to go out and kill as many fish as possible.

In New England, where a few decades ago you could easily find 50-year-old lobsters weighing up to 30 pounds, scientists estimate that most lobsters today are caught within a year after they reach the legal minimum size at about age six. The situation is similar here, where crawfish were once so abundant they were considered a trash food, but now are fully exploited and command extraordinary prices.

Some countries have controlled overfshing by innovative management. Australia and New Zealand, for example, pioneered a system of individual quotas that has turned fishermen into conservationists. Their transferable licenses can be sold for whatever the market will bear, so like any property owner they think about resale value and how to avoid killing the fishery.

This system is often described as a way of turning hunter-gatherers into homesteaders. And according to one marine scientist, “Now we just tell the fishermen what our research shows about the fishery and they do the job of regulating themselves.”

Of course, cultural differences and lack of institutional capacity may make this system unworkable here, but it’s the kind of imaginative thinking that is needed if we want to save our fisheries and preserve our Bahamian way of life.

All these issues are under investigation by something called the Bahamas Biocomplexity Project, a five-year study that lives up to its name. Launched in 2002, it is headed by Dr Dan Brumbaugh of the American Museum of Natural History (www.amnh.org) and is funded by a $2.5 million grant from the US National Science Foundation.

The Project involves a variety of institutions – including the College of the Bahamas, the Caribbean Marine Research Institute and the University of Miami - in an ambitious effort to synthesize research from several disciplines (including oceanography, marine ecology, anthropology and economics) to figure out how to design effective marine reserve networks.

“In addition to looking at how single protected areas may influence ecological and human dynamics, we are also looking at the (larger) ecosystem—how the living fabric of habitats, organisms, and human uses functions across the shallow banks of the Bahamas,” Dr. Brumbaugh said.

This research will hopefully underpin decision-making in the Bahamas, and contribute to the science of conserving marine ecosystems worldwide. It is a worthwhile goal. And simply looking the other way will result in the loss of many things Bahamians currently hold dear.

Comments

[Edward Taylor, fisheries inspector]

I noted with interest your commentary in the Tribune on January 25 2006 discussing the Ban on Nassau grouper and the benefits of marine reserves in The Bahamas.

However, I wish to point out that the ban issued by the Department of Fisheries relates to Nassau Grouper (Epinephelus striatus) only and not other species of grouper such as Yellowfin grouper; Black grouper; Gag grouper; Scamp grouper; Misty grouper and Red grouper.

During the Ban from December 13 2005 to February 12 2006 it is illegal to take, land, possess, sell and offer for sale the Nassau grouper. However, it is not illegal to take, land, possess, sell and offer for sale the remaining species of grouper mentioned above.

I felt this fact need to be clarified in your commentary.

Keep up the good work,

[Nick Nuttall]

Well written Larry. If only some person in power would pay attention. Sometimes - and many thanks for the 'tireless" compliment = I get very tired of banging my bald pate against apathy and indifference.