Shellfish Fishery Severely Reduces Condition and Survival of Oystercatchers Despite Creation of Large Marine Protected Areas

By S. Verhulst, K. Oosterbeek, Anne L. Rutten, B. Ens. 2004

94 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Fisheries and other human activities pose a global threat to the marine environment. Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an emerging tool to cope with such threats. In the Dutch Wadden Sea, large MPAs (covering 31% of all intertidal flats) have been created to protect shellfish-eating birds and allow recovery of important habitats. Even though shellfish fishing is prohibited in these areas, populations of shellfish-eating birds in the Wadden Sea have declined sharply. The role of shellfish fisheries in these declines is hotly debated, therefore, we investigated the effectiveness of MPAs for protecting oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus) populations. Shellfish stocks (cockles, Cerastoderma edule) were substantially higher in the MPAs, but surprisingly this has not resulted in a redistribution of wintering oystercatchers. Oystercatchers in unprotected areas had less shellfish in their diet and lower condition (a combined measure of mass and haematological parameters), and their estimated mortality was 43% higher. It is likely, therefore, that shellfish fishing explains at least part of the 40% decline in oystercatcher numbers in recent years. Condition and mortality effects were strongest in males, and the population sex ratio was female biased, in agreement with the fact that males rely more on shellfish. The unprotected areas apparently function as an "ecological trap," because oystercatchers did not respond as anticipated to the artificial spatial heterogeneity in food supply. Consequently, the MPAs are effective on a local scale, but not on a global scale. Similar problems are likely to exist in terrestrial ecosystems, and distribution strategies of target species need to be considered when designing terrestrial and marine protected areas if they are to be effective.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de1a72c5aebb1da04e16bcc539f3ff94c2dfd7d0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. Sylvia L. Smith
2. Sophie Bourgeon
3. Kristina Rothley
4. C. Semeniuk
5. J. Ruesink
6. B. Dumbauld

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Sylvia L. Smith
2. Sophie Bourgeon
3. Kristina Rothley
4. C. Semeniuk
5. J. Ruesink
6. S. Rumrill
7. B. Dumbauld
8. Dane H. Klinger

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. J. Ruesink
2. Francesca Gherardi
3. K. Fausch

Citations in the corpus

• Hematological differences between stingrays at tourist and non-visited sites suggest physiological costs of wildlife tourism. (2009, background): “Regardless of the cause, because lowered hematocrit is an aggregate, general indicator of poor health state and nutritional condition of animals in the wild (e.g., Verhulst et al., 2004; Huitu et al., 2007), we believe it also reflects the general, poorer state of tourist stingrays, as well.”
• The ecological role of bivalve shellfish aquaculture in the estuarine environment: A review with application to oyster and clam culture in West Coast (USA) estuaries (2009, background): “…in Spain (Navedo and Masero, 2008) appeared to have low impact and be sustainable, while larger scale effects of dredge harvesting on wild stocks of mussels and cockles in intertidal areas of the Dutch Wadden Sea are highly debated (Piersma et al., 2001; Verhulst et al., 2004; Kraan et al., 2007).”