Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
●
Seasonal closures
are useful components of management if there are particular
times when the hunted population is vulnerable (for example, around mating
or births). They are not adequate in themselves though, as they don't directly
reduce overall offtake levels. For example, even if the season is very short,
people might respond with huge harvesting effort.
●
Spatial restrictions
are an ancient management method, dating back to the
first royal hunting reserves and beyond. It is a fundamental component of our
conservation heritage, as expressed in nature reserves and other types of pro-
tected area (Adams 2004). In recent years it has become widely recognised
that spatial restrictions on hunting are potentially useful not just for conser-
vation, but also in order to enhance harvest yields, through providing a reservoir
of individuals to restock depleted areas. The idea is particularly current in
discussions of marine reserves (Gell and Roberts 2003).
One of the main advantages of closing areas to harvesting is its
robustness to
uncertainty
. If we are protecting a proportion of our stock, we can be more
confident about instituting sustainable use schemes in other areas, knowing that we
have a buffer against failure if our estimates of sustainable hunting levels turn out to
be wrong. Instituting permanent or rotating closures of parts of a hunted area (also
called
no-take zones
) is simple, transparent, relatively easy to enforce and has
knock-on benefits for the rest of the ecosystem. However, there are still ongoing
arguments about the degree to which spatial restrictions actually increase yields for
the harvested area as a whole (Hilborn
et al
. 2004). This depends principally on how
depleted the stocks are and the rate of dispersal from the hunted to the unhunted
area. There are also questions about what proportion of the hunted area should be
closed to optimise its effectiveness. The evidence from real systems about the
successes of no-take zones as a harvest management measure is ambiguous (Willis
et al
. 2003), while from the conservation angle, protected areas have been criticised
for their effects on the socio-economic status of local people (Borrini-Feyerabend
et al
. 2004). Thus, although spatial restrictions have a lot of advantages, there are
also issues that need careful consideration. In particular, when working with local
communities, a
participatory approach
is needed to ensure that zonation is done
with the consent of all stakeholders (Beger
et al
. 2004; Box 7.4).
There is a huge range of interventions that fall under this heading, some of which also
contribute to improving opportunities for alternative livelihoods. At the most basic
level, just
talking to people
about your work, why you're in their area and what impli-
cations it may have for them is a basic courtesy that can lead on to fuller participation
by the community in conservation and by conservationists in the community.
Helping people in the communities where you work, being a good neighbour, is also
an important component of conservation success (Section 3.2.3.4).
It's not possible to live and work in an area and interact with local people without
becoming aware of their needs and priorities and wanting to help them to improve
