ADF&G’s Program for Marine Protected Areas in Alaska

Doug Woodby, MPA Task Force chairAlaska Department of Fish and Game

Juneau, Alaska

Purpose: Make recommendations to the

Board of Fisheries

Approach: Science-based Focus on Reserves in relation to

fisheries

MPA Task Force

Task Force Composition

Commercial Fisheries Division– Earl Krygier, Denby Lloyd, Kristin Mabry, Tory O’Connell,

Charlie Trowbridge, Doug Woodby (chair)

Habitat Division– Janet Hall-Schempf

Sport Fish Division– Scott Meyer

Wildlife Conservation– Bob Small

Commissioner’s Office– Rob Bosworth

Definitions

Marine Protected Area

Areas designated for special protection to enhance the management of marine resources (NRC 2001)

with “year-round protection” (NOAA 2001)

Marine Reserve

zones within an MPA where removal or disturbance of resources is prohibited” = “no-take” areas (NRC 2001)

Impetus for MPA Public Process

Executive Order 13158 (2000)– Directive to develop national system of MPAs

Public proposals to Board of Fisheries– Proposals 42, 402, 424 for Marine Reserves

ADF&G staff interest in MPAs as management tools

Provisions of Magnuson-Stevens Act (1996)– Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

– Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC)

Industry concern for further loss of fishing areas

1. Recommendation for process

2. Literature review of the scientific basis

3. Catalogue and GIS maps of areas

4. Legal process for designating MPAs

5. Review of programs in other jurisdictions: Federal U.S., CA, OR, WA, BC

MPA Task Force Report

1. Recommendation for process Goals and uses of MPAs in Alaska Enhanced public participation

(by March 2002 for April proposal deadline)

Site selection, size, and other design criteria

Monitoring and evaluation of effectiveness

MPA Task Force Report

2. Literature review of the scientific basis Conserving biodiversity (inside reserves) Improving fishery yields outside of

reserves Design criteria: size and location

MPA Task Force Report

3. Catalogue and GIS maps of Existing MPAs Type of protections History Jurisdiction and legal basis Boundaries

MPA Task Force Report

4. Legal process for designating MPAs Board process Council process Joint Board and Council, IPHC Legislative

MPA Task Force Report

Cape Edgecumbe (Sitka) Pinnacles

Closed to taking of all groundfish

Protects significant concentrations of lingcod

7.7 km2

5. Review of other programs: Federal U.S., CA, OR, WA, BC Public and legal processes Learn from mistakes and successes

MPA Task Force Report

Recommending a process to the Board– Science-based, focused on reserves– Significant public (stakeholder) process

Not recommending specific closed areas Opportunity to learn from mistakes and

successes elsewhere

Summary