- Fish and Marine Ecology, Fisheries, Aquaculture, Impact of dams on the Mekong River, Transboundary Water Issues, Water Policy, and 9 moreWater Management and Climate Change, Environmental Policy and Management, Natural Resources Management, Murray Darling, Mekong and Ganges Rivers, Marine Protected Areas, Fish Ecology, Wetlands, and Indigenous ecological knowledges and practicesedit
Despite their economic and ecological importance, migratory fishes of the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB) remain understudied, which hampers effective management to sustain valuable fisheries and address serious threats such as habitat... more
Despite their economic and ecological importance, migratory fishes of the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB) remain understudied, which hampers effective management to sustain valuable fisheries and address serious threats such as habitat degradation, development and overharvest. From a list of potential knowledge needs, a group of fisheries professionals most frequently identified six top priorities for managing migratory fishes in Cambodia: (1) population abundances and trends, (2) life cycles and life history, (3) migration timing and triggers, (4) migration routes and distances, (5) locations of key habitats and spawning areas, and (6) environmental and habitat requirements. These needs are discussed along with nine relevant methodologies for addressing them, including fisheries-dependent and fisheries-independent sampling, reproductive techniques and captive studies, otolith and genetic analysis tools, and tagging and imaging techniques. A suggested research framework is also presented t...
Research Interests:
Protected areas are frequently established as a management tool to conserve terrestrial and aquatic habitats and species. Monitoring and evaluation are a necessary part of adaptive management to determine whether such protected areas are... more
Protected areas are frequently established as a management tool to conserve terrestrial and aquatic habitats and species. Monitoring and evaluation are a necessary part of adaptive management to determine whether such protected areas are effectively meeting their objectives. While numerous initiatives have developed methods to evaluate terrestrial and marine protected areas (MPAs), similar efforts and resources are lacking for freshwater protected areas (FPAs), which have become widespread as a community-based fisheries management approach in the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB). This review summarizes published literature on the evaluation of marine and freshwater protected areas to provide guidance on the evaluation of community-managed FPAs in the LMB. Specifically, the review examines several indicators related to common objectives of aquatic protected areas and provides considerations for measuring these indicators in the context of community-managed freshwater protected areas in the LMB. Key conclusions include that first, FPAs should be established with clearly defined objectives, and these objectives should inform the selection of indicators for evaluation. Second, indicators identified for MPAs are highly relevant to FPAs, although methods may require adaptation to a freshwater environment. Finally, socioeconomic and governance indicators are overlooked in both MPA and FPA evaluations compared to biophysical indicators, and interdisciplinary assessment teams could ensure these indicators receive adequate consideration.
Research Interests:
1. Marine protected areas (MPAs) and freshwater protected areas (FPAs), collectively aquatic protected areas (APAs), share many commonalities in their design, establishment, and management , suggesting great potential for sharing lessons... more
1. Marine protected areas (MPAs) and freshwater protected areas (FPAs), collectively aquatic protected areas (APAs), share many commonalities in their design, establishment, and management , suggesting great potential for sharing lessons learned. However, surprisingly little has been exchanged to date, and both realms of inquiry and practice have progressed mostly independent of each other. 2. This paper builds on a session held at the 7 th World Fisheries Congress in Busan, South Korea, in May 2016, which explored crossover lessons between marine and freshwater realms, and included case studies of four MPAs and five FPAs (or clusters of FPAs) from nine countries. 3. This review uses the case studies to explore similarities, differences, and transferrable lessons between MPAs and FPAs under five themes: (1) ecological system; (2) establishment approaches; (3) effectiveness monitoring; (4) sustaining APAs; and (5) challenges and external threats. 4. Ecological differences between marine and freshwater environments may necessitate different approaches for collecting species and habitat data to inform APA design, establishment and monitoring, but once collected, similar spatial ecological tools can be applied in both realms. In contrast, many similarities exist in the human dimension of both MPA and FPA establishment and management, highlighting clear opportunities for exchanging lessons related to stakeholder engagement and support, and for using similar socio‐economic and governance assessment methods to address data gaps in both realms. 5. Regions that implement MPAs and FPAs could work together to address shared challenges, such as developing mechanisms for diversified and sustained funding, and employing integrated coastal/watershed management to address system‐level threats. Collaboration across realms could facilitate conservation of diadromous species in both marine and freshwater habitats. 6. Continued exchange and increased collaboration would benefit both realms, and may be facilitated by defining shared terminology, holding cross‐disciplinary conferences or sessions, publishing inclusive papers, and proposing joint projects.
Research Interests:
1. Marine protected areas (MPAs) and freshwater protected areas (FPAs), collectively aquatic protected areas (APAs), share many commonalities in their design, establishment, and management , suggesting great potential for sharing lessons... more
1. Marine protected areas (MPAs) and freshwater protected areas (FPAs), collectively aquatic protected areas (APAs), share many commonalities in their design, establishment, and management , suggesting great potential for sharing lessons learned. However, surprisingly little has been exchanged to date, and both realms of inquiry and practice have progressed mostly independent of each other.
2. This paper builds on a session held at the 7 th World Fisheries Congress in Busan, South Korea, in May 2016, which explored crossover lessons between marine and freshwater realms, and included case studies of four MPAs and five FPAs (or clusters of FPAs) from nine countries.
3. This review uses the case studies to explore similarities, differences, and transferrable lessons between MPAs and FPAs under five themes: (1) ecological system; (2) establishment approaches; (3) effectiveness monitoring; (4) sustaining APAs; and (5) challenges and external threats.
4. Ecological differences between marine and freshwater environments may necessitate different approaches for collecting species and habitat data to inform APA design, establishment and monitoring, but once collected, similar spatial ecological tools can be applied in both realms. In contrast, many similarities exist in the human dimension of both MPA and FPA establishment and management, highlighting clear opportunities for exchanging lessons related to stakeholder engagement and support, and for using similar socio‐economic and governance assessment methods to address data gaps in both realms.
5. Regions that implement MPAs and FPAs could work together to address shared challenges, such as developing mechanisms for diversified and sustained funding, and employing integrated coastal/watershed management to address system‐level threats. Collaboration across realms could facilitate conservation of diadromous species in both marine and freshwater habitats.
6. Continued exchange and increased collaboration would benefit both realms, and may be facilitated by defining shared terminology, holding cross‐disciplinary conferences or sessions, publishing inclusive papers, and proposing joint projects.
2. This paper builds on a session held at the 7 th World Fisheries Congress in Busan, South Korea, in May 2016, which explored crossover lessons between marine and freshwater realms, and included case studies of four MPAs and five FPAs (or clusters of FPAs) from nine countries.
3. This review uses the case studies to explore similarities, differences, and transferrable lessons between MPAs and FPAs under five themes: (1) ecological system; (2) establishment approaches; (3) effectiveness monitoring; (4) sustaining APAs; and (5) challenges and external threats.
4. Ecological differences between marine and freshwater environments may necessitate different approaches for collecting species and habitat data to inform APA design, establishment and monitoring, but once collected, similar spatial ecological tools can be applied in both realms. In contrast, many similarities exist in the human dimension of both MPA and FPA establishment and management, highlighting clear opportunities for exchanging lessons related to stakeholder engagement and support, and for using similar socio‐economic and governance assessment methods to address data gaps in both realms.
5. Regions that implement MPAs and FPAs could work together to address shared challenges, such as developing mechanisms for diversified and sustained funding, and employing integrated coastal/watershed management to address system‐level threats. Collaboration across realms could facilitate conservation of diadromous species in both marine and freshwater habitats.
6. Continued exchange and increased collaboration would benefit both realms, and may be facilitated by defining shared terminology, holding cross‐disciplinary conferences or sessions, publishing inclusive papers, and proposing joint projects.
Research Interests: Fisheries, Marine Protected Areas, Cambodia, Laos (Lao PDR), Marine Conservation, and 13 moreFisheries Management, Thailand, Chile, Great Lakes, Bangladesh, Protected areas, Small scale fisheries, Mexico, Myanmar, Madagascar, Freshwater, Freshwater Fish Conservation, and Community-Based Fisheries Management
Marine protected areas (MPAs) can potentially alter food web dynamics by increasing the density of fishes within their borders. Such increases in the density of potential competitors can cause generalist predators to contract the scope of... more
Marine protected areas (MPAs) can potentially alter food web dynamics by increasing the density of fishes within their borders. Such increases in the density of potential competitors
can cause generalist predators to contract the scope of their diets. This study investigated the effects of increased conspecific fish density on the diets of gopher rockfish Sebastes carnatus at a 35 yr old MPA in Point Lobos, California, and at 4 newly established MPAs in Año Nuevo, Point
Lobos, Piedras Blancas, and Point Buchon in central California. Analyses were conducted for 707 stomachs collected from 2007 to 2009. Diets did not differ inside versus outside the old Point Lobos MPA in terms of prey richness, evenness, composition, or gopher rockfish trophic level. However, fish outside the MPA had greater levels of individual specialization. No consistent differences in these metrics were observed inside versus outside the 4 new MPAs, although prey composition
and evenness did differ significantly among geographic locations. Diets at Año Nuevo, the most northern and shallow location, consisted predominantly of Cancer spp. and porcelain crabs (Porcellanidae), while diets from southern, deeper locations were dominated by brittle stars (Ophiuroidea).
The case study of the old Point Lobos MPA indicates that fish feeding ecology may not change in an MPA after several decades. Differences in prey observed among geographic locations suggest variation in the community composition among central California’s new MPAs, which may influence the effect of each MPA on food web dynamics over time.
can cause generalist predators to contract the scope of their diets. This study investigated the effects of increased conspecific fish density on the diets of gopher rockfish Sebastes carnatus at a 35 yr old MPA in Point Lobos, California, and at 4 newly established MPAs in Año Nuevo, Point
Lobos, Piedras Blancas, and Point Buchon in central California. Analyses were conducted for 707 stomachs collected from 2007 to 2009. Diets did not differ inside versus outside the old Point Lobos MPA in terms of prey richness, evenness, composition, or gopher rockfish trophic level. However, fish outside the MPA had greater levels of individual specialization. No consistent differences in these metrics were observed inside versus outside the 4 new MPAs, although prey composition
and evenness did differ significantly among geographic locations. Diets at Año Nuevo, the most northern and shallow location, consisted predominantly of Cancer spp. and porcelain crabs (Porcellanidae), while diets from southern, deeper locations were dominated by brittle stars (Ophiuroidea).
The case study of the old Point Lobos MPA indicates that fish feeding ecology may not change in an MPA after several decades. Differences in prey observed among geographic locations suggest variation in the community composition among central California’s new MPAs, which may influence the effect of each MPA on food web dynamics over time.