| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian "Adat" Communities | Negative (1) | This is actually the subject of debate. Many argue that adat communities did not have a significant impact on forests - or if they did it was the result of their exclusion from other economic activities - see for example, Peluso 1992 & Dove 1996. However other studies show that there was an impact, and that activities by these communities did have a negative impact (e.g. Heydir 1999). In resolving this debate, it is probably useful to consider proximate and underlying causes - rural communities may have frequently been the proximate cause of forest cover change, while the ultimate cause of their activities may have rested elsewhere in the political system. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Large Extractive Industries in Indonesia | Negative (1) | This actor group was the primary actor responsible for spreading deforestation and forest degradation. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | "New Order" Indonesian Central Government (1965-1998) | Negative (1) | The governance system in this period aimed to increase profitability of forest related industries by liquidating existing stocks of forests, and thus contributed to worsening the condition of the forests. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian "Adat" Communities | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | unclear. Most studies of this period do not focus on this actor group, which historically was held responsible for degrading some commons (i.e. see Heydir 1999). |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Large Extractive Industries in Indonesia | Negative (1) | Extractive industries are a major driver of forest degradation in Indonesia. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Civil society organizations in Indonesia | | not clear if they've had an effect? |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | "Reformasi" Indonesian Central Government (1998-2012) | Negative (1) | This is very debatable. Some would argue that the govt. has improved the govenrance of the forests, resulting in lower deforestation, but there is substantial evidence that any decreases in deforestation rates may be due to other factors, and that this group contributed to increasing deforestation. See Arnold (2008) and Fleischman et al. (2014). |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian Local entrepreneurs | Negative (1) | This group has contributed to undermining effective forest law enforcement. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian District Governments | | ? |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Contracting Parties | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | ICCAT contracting parties have not had an appreciable positive or negative effect on Western stocks over this snapshot. Western stock is, however, well below its historical peak. |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Nation States | Positive (3) | Emissions of ODS has declined substantially since implementation of the Protocol. |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Depleting Substance Industrial Producers | Positive (3) | Significant decline in ODS emissions |
|---|
| International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) | Governance | ICPR nations (1976-1986) | | |
|---|
| International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) | Governance | Rhine chemical firms | Positive (3) | Important abatement efforts since the 1970s in advance of tighter regulations by governments at national and international level. Concentrations of some pollutants like Cadmium and Zinc decreased by more than 80% |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR government co-managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Effect based on zoning system, which is what GBRMPA and QPWS use for management. At the scale of the whole reef, too much land-based run-off (sedimentation, nutrients) negatively affects coral cover. Locally, though, no-take areas can increase coral cover by maintaining a healthy ecosystem. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Recreational fishing has limited direct effects on coral cover, and thus is unlikely to have influenced coral cover much. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Recreational fishing has limited direct effects on coral cover, and thus is unlikely to have influenced coral cover much. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Negative (1) | Fisheries declined in this time period |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Negative (1) | If there was no commercial fishing. fish populations would be higher. But through buy-outs and exiting of some fishers from the fishery, fish are better off than they used to be. Also some benefits from compliance to re-zoning |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Depleting Substance Industrial Producers | Negative (1) | Emissions of ODS have tended to increase over this snapshot |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Nation States | Negative (1) | Nation states have failed to adequately regulate ODS, and as a result emissions increased over this snapshot |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Artisan Fishermen | Negative (1) | During this snap shot the fishery has become 'depleted' and the brown sea cucumber economically extinct.
Fishery began in early 1990's to peak in 2002 with catch of 8 million individuals and declined steeply after that. Quotas not filled in 2004 and 2005, and complete closure of fishery in 2006. Drop to less than 10% of maximum recorded values.
(See Hearn et al 2005, Hearn 2008, Shepherd et al 2005, Wolff et al 2011, Jones 2013) |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Negative (1) | Toothfish stocks have declined over this snapshot; although this is in keeping with the goals of the toothfish management plan. |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi managers | Missing | Check |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | GMR managers | Negative (1) | Fishery has become depleted and is now closed because it is economically extinct.
During this time period, the limits set by the managers were based on consensus rather than science, with fishing allowed even when densities were too low, and poor enforcement of rules and regulations. Huge outside pressure from Asian markets driving illegal and over-fishing.
Multiple papers state that governance effectiveness has been undermined by consensus rather than science-based policies. (Shepherd et al 2004) |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Tourism Sector | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Turtle populations are stable. Tourist trampling on nesting beaches and boat strikes are a threat to green turtles - tourist numbers are limited on beaches to prevent this (Zarate 2006) and measures are being put in place to manage boat strikes (Stuart Banks pers comm). |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Bajau are generally blamed for over-fishing and destructive fishing methods - but the extent that is actually occuring and is conducted by the Bajau is difficult to determine and unclear if this applies to fish spawning sites, or the MPA as a whole |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Difficult to determine due to lack of data on turtple populations and catch composition. But likely that any offtake of turtle - an endangered, long-lived, and slow to reproduce species - will have negative imacts on the population, but offtake is limited and it is not a prefered target species. |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Bajau are commonly associated with destructive practices, including blast and poison fishing. Reports that blast fishing declined after 2005/6 (Exton), but apparently an increase 2011-2012 (Clifton 2013). - therefore coded as mixed effects |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | National Marine Sanctuaries Office of NOAA | Positive (3) | Humpback whale populations have increased and ship strikes and strandings have decreased. Research and monitoring has increased knowledge of Humpback populations. Tourism focused on Humpback whales has increased as well. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Academic Researchers | Positive (3) | Researchers have identified hot spots of humpback whale locations and associated highly likely locations with shipping lanes to minimize ship strike occurrences, which have decreased. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Academic Researchers | Positive (3) | Monitoring and observing has led to more information about this ecosystem to better protect and restore the habitat. |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | Positive (3) | Some areas are no-take and levels of destructive fishing are low. Appears to be high complicane with local rules |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Managers | Positive (3) | Coral cover remains high, and use of destructive fishing practices almost eliminated |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Tourism | Positive (3) | The fee from tourism is used to pay for community projects, including paying for community patrols of MPAs. The revenue is now overseen by raja ampat governement (previously suuported by CI). |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | Positive (3) | Local poaching and use of turtles has dramiatically declined - not using pigs as alternative protein source, so positive impact on turtles. (population increasing - approx. 2007-2012 they were seeing ~20% annual increases M.Erdmann pers comm) |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | Positive (3) | Some areas are no-take and cyanide fishing is almost eliminated, closure of certain areas (sasi)
(Boli, 2014). |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Managers | Positive (3) | Coral cover remains high, and use of destructive fishing practices almost eliminated |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California State and Federal Fisheries Agencies | Positive (3) | By limiting trawling in areas, establishing rockfish conservation areas, and created quotas, the habitat is protected from major threats and can recover. |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Macquarie Island Managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The population has remained stable based upon the best available evidence. It is possible that the eradication of invasive rats, mice, rabbits and cats will benefit the population over longer time periods. |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Tourism | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The impacts of viewing polar bears are considered to be very low at the present time. At the current levels of tourism it is unlikely that disturbance to an individual bear(s) would have any effects at the population level. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | Negative (1) | If there was no recreational fishing, target fish would be better off. That said, participation in recreational fishing has declined. While rec fishing is still considered an important impact on target fish, reduced participation and compliance to fisheries regulations and MPA rules means they are having less of an effect than they used to. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR government co-managers | Positive (3) | The MPA and its enforcement have had significant benefits for fisheries. Coral cover and economic species continue to decline however due largely to external threats for land-use changes, pollution, and climate change |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Entanglement and vessel disturbance are threats to southern right whales caused by commercial fishing. Reports, although an underestimate, appear to be minimal with 1 fatal entanglement and 12 non-fatal entanglements of southern right whales recorded 1950–2006 (Kemper et al. 2006). |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Shrimp Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Fishing reduces the shrimp population. However, regulations aim to keep the population healthy, and the NAFO (2012b) indicates that the shrimp population is in ‘satisfactory condition’. The estimates of shrimp biomass have fluctuated throughout the snapshot, but appear reasonably stable over time. Therefore, although fishing would always have a ‘negative impact’ this impact on the population may be well-regulated so that the impact is small. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Although SBT populations are heavily depleted, Australian Commercial fishers have followed their alloted quotas for SBT and for this snap-shot and SBT stocks appear stable - so coded as no real effect for this snap shot.
The SBT has been intensively fished since the 1950s and the decline in the total population of SBT to 7-15% of the 1960 parental biomass is well documented (FSC 2009). Based on the median results of this most recent stock assessment, there has been an estimated 85.4% decline in spawning stock biomass over the past 36 years from 1973 to 2009 (CCSBT 2010). |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Director of National Parks | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Although commercial fishing for tuna in the GABMP (CW) is carried out under a permit issued by the Director, the amount of tuna harvested and enforcement of this fishery is managed by the CCSBT and the AFMA.
|
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Antarctic Division | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The population would likely be doing the same without the management plan in place. Protection of breeding sights on the islands is largely de facto based on isolation rather than active management. Effective protection on the water has less to do with the no-take marine reserve, but is rather a result of fisheries measures which work to prevent the incidental catch of albatross. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Negative (1) | Toothfish stocks have declined over this snapshot; although this is in keeping with the goals of the toothfish management plan. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Fisheries Management Authority | Negative (1) | Fish stocks have declined over the course of management, but they remain above the "sustainable" management goal of reducing the stock by 50%. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Director of National Parks | Negative (1) | GABMP/Bunda Cliffs population has undergone ~64% decline over three generations - IUCN.
Study by Hamer et al. (2011) states gillnetting was formally identified as a key threat to the conservation of Australian sea lions in 2005 and management has continued to permit the use of gillnets across most of the GABMP. Harmer et al. (2011) suggests imposing bycatch limits and year round exclusion of gillnetting. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | Negative (1) | Bycatch of Australian sealions in gillnets has been proposed as a key threat to the conservation of Australian sealions (DEWHA 2008, Hamer et al. 2011). |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Tourism | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The impacts of the tourism industry viewing kittiwakes are likely fairly low. They nest on steep cliffs so physical access is difficult. Noise from vessels and zodiacs may be an issue, especially when considering cumulative effects through time and space (Weilgart 2007). |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Not Applicable | |
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | Seaflower artisanal fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | This is debatable given that overfishing of certain species within this ecosystem might had have a negative impact on coral reefs. |
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | Seaflower artisanal fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Based on the biological monitoring report from 2014, there was no statistical difference in the abundance of groupers between 2000 and 2014. However, the authors not the that this is largely due to high data variability as the biomass of groupers in 2000 was twice as high as in 2014. This is only for Old Providence and Santa Catalina. |
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | CORALINA | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Based on the biological monitoring report from 2014, there was no statistical difference in the abundance of groupers between 2000 and 2014. However, the authors not the that this is largely due to high data variability as the biomass of groupers in 2000 was twice as high as in 2014. This is only for Old Providence and Santa Catalina. |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR fisheries managers | Positive (3) | Through enforcement of fisheries management and the re-zoning. |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Contracting Parties | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Between 1985 and 1995, eastern stocks were generally stable and relatively near their historical peaks. Catches had increased over this period and may have contributed to later declines. Nonetheless, during the interval ICCAT's activities appear to have contributed to a relatively stable resource stock. |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Contracting Parties | Negative (1) | Clear declines in Eastern stock over this snapshot, some suggestions that ICCAT has not done enough to ensure that contracting parties adequately implement regulations, and that quotas have been too high. |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Western Members | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Western members have not had an appreciable positive or negative impact on resource stocks over this snapshot. |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Eastern Members | Negative (1) | Decline in Eastern ABFT catches and stocks during this snapshot. A lack of appropriate monitoring is often cited as a potential cause of this decline. |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Secretariat | Positive (3) | ODS levels have declined substantially during this snapshot, and although not all of this can be attributed to the efforts of the Ozone Secretariat, they do play an important role in the governance of the Montreal Protocol |
|---|
| Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ICCAT) | Governance | ICCAT Eastern Members | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | There was no appreciable increase or decline in resource stocks. There was also a fairly large increase in catches. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Groundfish Fishermen | Negative (1) | Trawling was the primary negative effect this actor group had on the commons. Now, less so with the regulations, though trawling still exists. While bycatch is substantially lower than before, bycatch was historically and is somewhat an issue today, especially with long lines. Lost fishing gear is a negative effect as well, especially with trap pots. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR government co-managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Effect based on zoning system, which is what GBRMPA and QPWS use for management. At the scale of the whole reef, too much land-based run-off (sedimentation, nutrients) negatively affects coral cover, so zoning is not enough to reverse trends of declining coral cover. Locally, though, no-take areas can increase coral cover by maintaining a healthy ecosystem. |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Highly variable throughout the park. |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi managers | Positive (3) | Have introduce zoning of the MPA including no-take areas which protect spawning aggregations. |
|---|
| Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) Marine National Monument | Governance | NWHI Monument Co-Trusteeship | Positive (3) | All anthropogenic threats have been eliminated as they whole area is no-take, so the actor effect is positive. But the lobster populations are yet to recover. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | GMR managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Populations of green turtles are stable - so management has helped maintain a healthy population |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Fisheries Management Authority | Negative (1) | Fish stocks have declined, but they remain above the threshold goal of 50% of unfished levels. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | GMR managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Coded as mixed effects - as different for mnay species, many of which have probabably experienced a decline.
From Hearn interview: "there are still schools of sharks. But population trends depends who you speak to - dive guides will say there’s a lot less sharks than there were in the past especially in the centre of the archipelago. Overall, no long term data sets, so more focussed on people’s perception of shark numbers. Inferences are that whale sharks numbers have been unaffected, Hammerheads keep on declining. Reef sharks are increasing, and tigers are more common. But there are also a lot more divers now." |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Tourism Sector | Positive (3) | Coded as positive because of interest in dive tourism and shark conservation and education, huge lobbying effort by tourism sector for areas with high shark densities to be protected (Jones 2013, Hearn et al 2013) |
|---|
| Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) Marine National Monument | Governance | NWHI Monument Co-Trusteeship | Positive (3) | Bottom trawling and pealgic fishing banned in 2011 - now completely no take so no direct effects on trophic density. |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Macquarie Island Managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Most estimates indicate that populations of Royal Penguin are stable. It is possible that pest eradication programs might yield long-term net benefits, but as of now they do not appear to have significantly improved or harmed Royal Penguins. |
|---|
| Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) Marine National Monument | Governance | NWHI Monument Co-Trusteeship | Positive (3) | Population increasing |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | National Marine Sanctuaries Office of NOAA | Positive (3) | Protection has led to increased protection of rocky shore habitat from trampling, pollution, oil spills, maintaining biodiversity in systems and likely leading to the fast resilience of the habitat. The Sanctuary's efforts to increase water quality has had a positive impact on this habitat. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Sanctuary Recreational Users | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Mixed effects. Recreational users are significant players in monitoring this species, and in contributing to data to relate to industry to reduce ship strikes. However, some studies have shown whale watching vessels could be influencing behavior or masking foraging capabilities. |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Managers | Positive (3) | Turtle rookeries considered to be well protected and poaching has been reduced.
A turtle nest-guarding team developed by local NGO Papuan Sea Turtle Foundation (YPP) and staffed by local villagers has effectively reduced turtle poaching from an estimated 95 percent mortality of nests and nesting turtles to zero in the Piai Island Rookery, with over 1400 green turtle nests successfully laid and hatched since September 2006. (CI Seascape Factsheet 2008) |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Fisheries Management Authority | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | It is generally believed that the light mantled albatross population on Macquarie Island is stable; and there have been no known fatal interactions between light-mantled albatross and the toothfish fishery. |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Resource Managers | Positive (3) | Monitoring that people are abiding by the rules (e.g. no hunting, not going to close to the bears) and enforcing infractions has likely prevented unnecessary bear deaths, which would have a positive outcome for the population. However, this positive benefit may be small in magnitude. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Charles Darwin Foundation | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The science collected by the CDF has provided baseline and information on green turtles - populations are thought to be stable (Stuart Banks pers comm, and CDF reports) |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Resource Managers | Positive (3) | Implementing, monitoring, and enforcing the regulations has helped ensure that the fish stocks have remained in satisfactory condition - the shrimp stock in the Barents Sea has been at a relatively high level since 2005
http://www.fisheries.no/ecosystems-and-stocks/marine_stocks/shellfish/shrimp/#.VfxI2Zf08ms |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Resource Managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Overall, the kittiwake population is stable when averaged across all sites.
Declines appear linked to prey availability rather than any management actions. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Director of National Parks | Positive (3) | Populations are increasing in the area
|
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | CORALINA | Negative (1) | Coral cover definitely decreased since 2000. However, it is not that CORALINA used the commons in any way. They managed it. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Charles Darwin Foundation | Positive (3) | Increased knowledge on ecology of sharks within the GMR, including movement patterns, aggregations, susceptibility to long-lining, nursery areas (see Hearn et al. 2014) |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Negative (1) | Although the effects of bycatch are difficult to assess (in part because there is likely many instances where it is not reported (GBR Outlook Report 2014)), bycatch may be considerable (Robbins 1999, Hays et al 2003). |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR government co-managers | Positive (3) | Monitoring and enforcement of legislation and adherence to the marine zones have most likely had a positive impact on the turtle population - protection of major rookeries, mandatory use of turtle excluding devices for fishing since early 2000s |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR fisheries managers | Positive (3) | The Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) tracks the location of commercial vessels, and Queensland Boating and Fisheries Patrol conducts on the water monitoring to ensure compliance with the laws. This monitoring has likely increased compliance and has contributed to a positive impact on the green turtle population. |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | No Light mantled albatross or other seabird species for that matter has been taken as bycatch in the Macquarie Island Toothfish fishery. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Fisheries Management Authority | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Through the development and implementation of seabird bycatch mitigation measures, the AFMA has theoretically had a positive effect on the light mantled albatross. However, there is no data to support that the light-mantled albatross populations have increased. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | While the threat remains for light mantled albatross to be incidentally caught in toothfish longline operations at HIMI (this area is considered a Category 4: average to high risk of incidental mortality of seabirds; CCAMLR 2013), there have been no reported deaths of light mantled albatross (between 2004-2013, data reported to ACAP) and very few reported deaths of all seabirds. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Antarctic Division | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The population would probably be doing the same without the management plan in place. Protection is largely de facto based on isolation rather than active management. Very few tourists visit the islands and even fewer scientists.. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Charles Darwin Foundation | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | The research and guidelines put forward by CDF was not adhered to |
|---|
| Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) Marine National Monument | Governance | NWHI Researchers | Positive (3) | Led to increasing understanding of the system |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Some positive impacts inlcuding zoning and management. introducing enterance fee for tourists (although this goes striaght to central government) |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Some positive impacts inlcuding zoning and management. introducing enterance fee for tourists (although this goes striaght to central government) |
|---|
| Falkland Islands squid | Governance | Falkland Islands Government (FIG) Fisheries Managers | Positive (3) | Management has been proactive in closing the fishery before overfishing has occurred (before biomass declines). |
|---|
| Falkland Islands squid | Governance | Patagonian Squid Trawlers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Fishermen are extractors and so have natural negative impact, but also are monitors and contribute to sustainable use (positive impact). Fishery has been stable ecologically. |
|---|
| New Zealand squid | Governance | New Zealand Arrow Squid Fishers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Help monitor, but also extract. No evidence or reports of overfishing. |
|---|
| California squid | Governance | California Department of Fish and Wildlife Market Squid Managers | Positive (3) | Protect habitat and population status. |
|---|
| California squid | Governance | California market squid fishermen | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Population is likely the same (or slightly under) without fishing. |
|---|
| Pond aquaculture on Lombok, Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian Institute of Sciences - LIPI | | |
|---|
| Pond aquaculture on Lombok, Indonesia | Governance | Lombok aquaculture farmers | Missing | |
|---|
| Pond aquaculture on Lombok, Indonesia | Governance | Lombok aquaculture farmers | | |
|---|
| Caete-Teperacu Extractive Reserve (RESEX) in Braganca, Brazil | Governance | Association of Users in the Caete-Teperacu RESEX (ASSUREMACATA) in Brazil | Negative (1) | |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | SCUBA diving businesses on Gili Trawangan | Negative (1) | Impacts from SCUBA diving |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | Gili Indah Dive Association (GIDA) | Missing | |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | Gili EcoTrust on Gili Trawangan | Positive (3) | |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | Gili Indah Dive Association (GIDA) | Missing | |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Isla Caballo AMPR Costa Rica | Missing | |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Palito-Montero AMPR Costa Rica | Missing | |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Paquera-Tambor AMPR Costa Rica | Missing | |
|---|
| New Zealand squid | Governance | New Zealand Fishery Managers | No real effect or mixed effects (2) | Unsure. Likely positive since before QMS lots of foreign vessels fishing. Now is effort limited. |
|---|
