Chapter 25 Seagrass Conservation Biology
611
designated areas were supported by the available scientific data (National Marine Fisheries Service 2001;
Recovery Plan for Johnson’s Seagrass, Halophila
johnsonii).
Direct protection by law or decree is most successful where there is adequate enforcement, widespread
community support, and where scientific information supports the statutes. There are many examples where scientists are either tasked by agencies
or voluntarily participate in conducting applied research in direct support of the designated rules or
laws (Homziak et al., 1982; Fonseca et al., 2002a;
Kenworthy et al., 2002; Orth et al., 2002; Whitfield
et al., 2002). In developed countries like Australia,
New Zealand, Japan, the United States, and the European Union Coastal States, government and nongovernment scientists formally participate in the
process of reviewing and recommending actions pertaining to permits for development in the coastal
zone as mandated by several statutes (Stephan and
Bigford, 1997; Coles and Fortes, 2001). These countries have legislation requiring permits where damage to seagrass is likely, but the process is controversial, and decisions sometimes result in a net
loss of habitat, even when there is every attempt
made to avoid, minimize, and mitigate damages after project approval. The cumulative impacts of this
approach can result in the degradation of seagrass
biomes on both local and regional scales. One of
the most challenging and critical areas of applied
science is detecting and monitoring subtle cumulative impacts, determining the scale at which these
are affecting entire systems, and either influencing
modification to the regulations, or the development
of new regulations to reverse the trend of cumulative
effects.
Several Mediterranean countries are establishing
specific legislative measures for seagrass protection
backed by science. For instance, Posidonia oceanica and Cymodocea nodosa are directly protected by
law in France and Spain and other examples include,
(1) The Directive ‘Habitat-Faune-Flore’ edited in
1992 by the European Commission and (2) The Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Vegetation
in the Mediterranean Sea, adopted in 1999 within
the framework of the Mediterranean Action Plan
(UNEP) by all Mediterranean countries (RAC-SPA,
2000).
To expand the role of science in conservation,
research is also needed to support and implement
laws not directly safeguarding seagrasses but conserving them indirectly by: (1) protecting other organisms such as fish (e.g. Essential Fish Habitat
or Fish Habitat Areas (Fluharty, 2000)), Special
Area Management in Malaysia (Nickerson-Tietze,
2000) or protection of wildlife (e.g. US Endangered
Species Act or IUCN Red List), (2) ensuring the
quality of habitats within which seagrasses exist (e.g.
U.S. Coastal Zone Management and Clean Water
Acts), and (3) preventing known or recently discovered threats (e.g. legislation forbidding the import of
exotic non-native species). These approaches must
synthesize information from many disciplines and
require the power of predictive models to forecast
the consequences of ‘no action’ alternatives. Such
approaches can have a significant positive impact on
seagrass conservation, provided the scientific information can be translated into effective and reasonable habitat and biome conservation policies.
There are several examples where scientists actively participate in these processes. In the U.S., Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) must be accompanied by designations of essential fish habitat (EFH)
which link critical life stages and trophic interactions of fisheries with the seagrass biome (Fluharty,
2000). The FMPs are prepared with input from a
range of disciplines including but not limited to,
biology, economics, and sociology and require the
consensus of a panel (Marine Fisheries Commission) reviewing both the scientific data as well as the
socio-economic factors. A similar program occurs in
Queensland, Australia with the designation of Fish
Habitat Areas (FHA). These particular examples and
any future scientific contributions affecting seagrass
conservation are going to be very important because
one of the recognized issues in marine conservation are problems associated with over-exploitation
of fisheries and fishing gear impacts to habitat, including seagrasses and associated communities (Peterson et al., 1987; De Jonge and De Jonge, 1992;
Jackson et al., 2001; Orth et al., 2002). These are
issues of community and ecosystem level science,
because research indicates that over-exploitation in
fisheries leads to a cascade of effects beyond just
the top level predators or the keystone species (Beck
et al., 2001; Heck and Orth, Chapter 22). In some
instances, over-exploitation or habitat removal leads
to shifts in productivity and community biodiversity.
Attention to these topics will be especially important
in developing countries where seagrass biomes are
not yet damaged excessively by human activities but
are under increasing threat due to the lack of control
611
designated areas were supported by the available scientific data (National Marine Fisheries Service 2001;
Recovery Plan for Johnson’s Seagrass, Halophila
johnsonii).
Direct protection by law or decree is most successful where there is adequate enforcement, widespread
community support, and where scientific information supports the statutes. There are many examples where scientists are either tasked by agencies
or voluntarily participate in conducting applied research in direct support of the designated rules or
laws (Homziak et al., 1982; Fonseca et al., 2002a;
Kenworthy et al., 2002; Orth et al., 2002; Whitfield
et al., 2002). In developed countries like Australia,
New Zealand, Japan, the United States, and the European Union Coastal States, government and nongovernment scientists formally participate in the
process of reviewing and recommending actions pertaining to permits for development in the coastal
zone as mandated by several statutes (Stephan and
Bigford, 1997; Coles and Fortes, 2001). These countries have legislation requiring permits where damage to seagrass is likely, but the process is controversial, and decisions sometimes result in a net
loss of habitat, even when there is every attempt
made to avoid, minimize, and mitigate damages after project approval. The cumulative impacts of this
approach can result in the degradation of seagrass
biomes on both local and regional scales. One of
the most challenging and critical areas of applied
science is detecting and monitoring subtle cumulative impacts, determining the scale at which these
are affecting entire systems, and either influencing
modification to the regulations, or the development
of new regulations to reverse the trend of cumulative
effects.
Several Mediterranean countries are establishing
specific legislative measures for seagrass protection
backed by science. For instance, Posidonia oceanica and Cymodocea nodosa are directly protected by
law in France and Spain and other examples include,
(1) The Directive ‘Habitat-Faune-Flore’ edited in
1992 by the European Commission and (2) The Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Vegetation
in the Mediterranean Sea, adopted in 1999 within
the framework of the Mediterranean Action Plan
(UNEP) by all Mediterranean countries (RAC-SPA,
2000).
To expand the role of science in conservation,
research is also needed to support and implement
laws not directly safeguarding seagrasses but conserving them indirectly by: (1) protecting other organisms such as fish (e.g. Essential Fish Habitat
or Fish Habitat Areas (Fluharty, 2000)), Special
Area Management in Malaysia (Nickerson-Tietze,
2000) or protection of wildlife (e.g. US Endangered
Species Act or IUCN Red List), (2) ensuring the
quality of habitats within which seagrasses exist (e.g.
U.S. Coastal Zone Management and Clean Water
Acts), and (3) preventing known or recently discovered threats (e.g. legislation forbidding the import of
exotic non-native species). These approaches must
synthesize information from many disciplines and
require the power of predictive models to forecast
the consequences of ‘no action’ alternatives. Such
approaches can have a significant positive impact on
seagrass conservation, provided the scientific information can be translated into effective and reasonable habitat and biome conservation policies.
There are several examples where scientists actively participate in these processes. In the U.S., Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) must be accompanied by designations of essential fish habitat (EFH)
which link critical life stages and trophic interactions of fisheries with the seagrass biome (Fluharty,
2000). The FMPs are prepared with input from a
range of disciplines including but not limited to,
biology, economics, and sociology and require the
consensus of a panel (Marine Fisheries Commission) reviewing both the scientific data as well as the
socio-economic factors. A similar program occurs in
Queensland, Australia with the designation of Fish
Habitat Areas (FHA). These particular examples and
any future scientific contributions affecting seagrass
conservation are going to be very important because
one of the recognized issues in marine conservation are problems associated with over-exploitation
of fisheries and fishing gear impacts to habitat, including seagrasses and associated communities (Peterson et al., 1987; De Jonge and De Jonge, 1992;
Jackson et al., 2001; Orth et al., 2002). These are
issues of community and ecosystem level science,
because research indicates that over-exploitation in
fisheries leads to a cascade of effects beyond just
the top level predators or the keystone species (Beck
et al., 2001; Heck and Orth, Chapter 22). In some
instances, over-exploitation or habitat removal leads
to shifts in productivity and community biodiversity.
Attention to these topics will be especially important
in developing countries where seagrass biomes are
not yet damaged excessively by human activities but
are under increasing threat due to the lack of control