As our world population continues to grow, it implies a higher demand
for resources. Whether these resources are food, water, or land, the
effect of this growth on our environment is often detrimental to
biodiversity and the health of our natural ecosystems, especially our
marine ecosystems. The ocean covers 71% of the earth’s surface and
therefore our actions on land and in the water have a massive impact on
marine ecosystems worldwide. Trade, fishing, tourism, and transportation
all impact our oceans and if we do not protect marine resources, future
generations will face limited fish stocks, polluted waters, and a loss
of biodiversity.
The implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs) attempts to
reduce the risk of destroying our marine ecosystems by reducing fishing
pressure and other marine impacts. MPAs are marine areas that have
usually been altered by humans and are in need of restoration and
conservation. MPAs serve to protect delicate ecosystems so that they
remain productive and healthy, maintain areas of biodiversity and
genetic variation within the flora and fauna populations, ensure that
endangered, threatened, or rare species are protected, promote
sustainable use of the area, protect indigenous areas for cultural
importance, and endorse research to preserve the area using the best
scientific knowledge (DOF 2007).
In Mexico, many areas have management policies in place for the
protection of the country’s environment, including coastal waters. With
the high volume of inhabitants as well as tourists visiting the country,
there is a need to protect the Mexican coastal areas from severe human
impact. But are these MPAs actually effective in preserving biodiversity
and resources? When trying to regulate an area such as the ocean,
enforcing the laws must be a collaborative effort. However, this is
especially difficult in Mexico where cooperation between communities,
local governments, and state governments is frequently lacking.
With a coastline of 11,500 km (~7,100 miles), the variation in marine
ecosystems in Mexico ranges from wetlands, mangrove forests, and
barrier islands to dunes, coral reefs, sea grass meadows, and offshore
islands (Inegi 2007, Vidal 2005). Within each of these ecosystems exists
a unique biodiversity of flora and fauna that provide valuable
environmental and economic benefits for Mexico and its inhabitants. The
oil industry, tourism, agriculture, urban development, fisheries, and
mining, however, can all negatively affect this precious marine life
(Fraga 2008). To combat this damage, Mexico created a piece of
legislation for environmental regulation called the General Law for
Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (LGEEPA). Balancing
sustainability with economic gain and preserving the environment, along
with conservation and protection of biodiversity are the main goals of
this law.
LGEEPA also provides the framework to create MPAs in Mexico. Since
1962, Mexico has been protecting marine and coastal areas by signing
many international agreements including CITES, UNCLOS, MARPOL, and
Ramsar to name a few. But with thirty-one states comprising Mexico and
each with their own individual environmental laws and legal mechanisms
(Bezaury-Creel 2005), decisions and agreements on how to manage and
handle the environment, specifically the marine and coastal areas, of
Mexico can be inconsistent and lead to poor and ineffective management.
For a managed area to be successful all parts of the government need
to cooperate with one another and the government needs to be centralized
on environmental issues for the best protection and results. One reason
for Mexico’s difficulty in creating effective MPAs is that they do not
yet have an integrated coastal management (ICM) system implemented into
their regulations. ICM would streamline all of the different coastal
management plans throughout the country into one consistent plan for the
entire country. Because of the various governmental agencies in Mexico,
however, ICM is not a top priority for the country currently.
Despite these governance challenges, Mexico has decided to stick with
MPAs as a way of protecting their marine ecosystems (Rivera Arriaga
2004). Because of limited information and data on the coastal zones and
limited management cooperation, ICM is not an appealing option for
Mexican governments. Instead, Mexico, as of March 2007, has implemented
61 MPA’s throughout the country (Fraga 2008).
Unfortunately, according to a study in May 2005, only 22 of 59 MPAs
had proper management plans and rules (Fraga 2008). Less than 50% of the
MPAs at the time were effective or allowing the protection of the
marine areas. The ineffectiveness of the MPAs can be attributed to the
difficulty in implementing them. Scientists must preform extensive
research on the area including social and cultural effects on the
community, they must collect basic information on the area and the
ecosystem, present a reason for protection, investigate the history and
culture of the area, take into consideration the socioeconomic status of
the area, present an overview of the land/water use, and present a
management plan with information on how the MPA will be operated and
managed (DOF 2007).
The Secretariat for the Environmental and Natural Resources
(SEMARNAT) and LGEEPA are in charge of approving new MPAs. SEMARNAT
requires the approval by the state and local governments and agencies,
the public and private social organizations, the indigenous people, and
the educational institutions (SEMARNAT 2007). LGEEPA requires
information on the precise location and boundaries of the area, the type
of protection needed, a list of activities that are allowed and not
allowed, a management plan, and a list of ways it will be operated,
enforced, and financed (DOF 2007).
The issue of finance is one of the greatest downfalls for MPAs.
Enforcement is key to the success of an MPA but without proper funds to
hire personnel to patrol the area, nothing can be accomplished. A lack
of management plans also makes MPAs ineffective because people will
continue to use the area indiscriminately and cause degradation. Often
economic interests overtake environmental interests, making MPAs a low
priority for the Mexican government.
Additionally, environmentalists and locals do not always agree on one
way for a marine area to be managed because environmentalists want to
protect the natural value while locals of Mexico rely on the ocean for
their livelihood. The ocean provides many natural resources that allow
locals to live and make money and they fear that MPAs will prevent them
from accessing these vital resources. The differing opinions between the
environmentalists and the locals brings about the conflict of using
science as a base for creating MPAs versus using traditional knowledge,
or a combination of both. According to LGEEPA and SEMARNAT, they both
see the importance of involving the local community, stakeholders, and
indigenous people when creating MPAs because they contribute traditional
knowledge about the area that scientists do not possess.
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment