Spatial cost–benefit analysis of blue restoration and factors driving net benefits globally

Marine coastal ecosystems, commonly referred to as blue ecosystems, provide valuable services to society but are under increasing threat worldwide due to a variety of drivers, including eutrophication, development, land-use change, land reclamation, and climate change. Ecological restoration is sometimes necessary to facilitate recovery in coastal ecosystems. Blue restoration (i.e., in marine coastal systems) is a developing field, and projects to date have been small scale and expensive, leading to the perception that restoration may not be economically viable. We conducted a global cost–benefit analysis to determine the net benefits of restoring coral reef, mangrove, saltmarsh, and seagrass ecosystems, where the benefit is defined as the monetary value of ecosystem services. We estimated costs from published restoration case studies and used an adjusted-value-transfer method to assign benefit values to these case studies. Benefit values were estimated as the monetary value provided by ecosystem services of the restored habitats. Benefits outweighed costs (i.e., there were positive net benefits) for restoration of all blue ecosystems. Mean benefit:cost ratios for ecosystem restoration were eight to 10 times higher than prior studies of coral reef and seagrass restoration, most likely due to the more recent lower cost estimates we used. Among ecosystems, saltmarsh had the greatest net benefits followed by mangrove; coral reef and seagrass ecosystems had lower net benefits. In general, restoration in nations with middle incomes had higher (eight times higher in coral reefs and 40 times higher in mangroves) net benefits than those with high incomes. Within an ecosystem type, net benefit varied with restoration technique (coral reef and saltmarsh), ecosystem service produced (mangrove and saltmarsh), and project duration (seagrass). These results challenge the perceptions of the low economic viability of blue restoration and should encourage further targeted investment in this field.     

Public Willingness to Pay for Recovering and Downlisting Threatened and Endangered Marine Species

Abstract: Nonmarket valuation research has produced economic value estimates for a variety of threatened, endangered, and rare species around the world. Although over 40 value estimates exist, it is often difficult to compare values from different studies due to variations in study design, implementation, and modeling specifications. We conducted a stated‐preference choice experiment to estimate the value of recovering or downlisting 8 threatened and endangered marine species in the United States: loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica), upper Willamette River Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Hawaiian monk seals (Monachus schauinslandi), and smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata). In May 2009, we surveyed a random sample of U.S. households. We collected data from 8476 households and estimated willingness to pay for recovering and downlisting the 8 species from these data. Respondents were willing to pay for recovering and downlisting threatened and endangered marine taxa. Willingness‐to‐pay values ranged from $40/household for recovering Puget Sound Chinook salmon to $73/household for recovering the North Pacific right whale. Statistical comparisons among willingness‐to‐pay values suggest that some taxa are more economically valuable than others, which suggests that the U.S. public's willingness to pay for recovery may vary by species.     

Shifting Baselines and The Extinction of The Caribbean Monk Seal

The recent extnction of the Caribbean monk seal Monachus tropicalis has been considered an example of a human‐caused extinction in the marine environment, and this species was considered a driver of the changes that have occurred in the structure of Caribbean coral reef ecosystems since colonial times. I searched archaeological records, historical data, and geographic names (used as a proxy of the presence of seals) and evaluated the use and quality of these data to conclude that since prehistoric times the Caribbean monk seal was always rare and vulnerable to human predation. This finding supports the hypothesis that in AD 1500, the Caribbean monk seal persisted as a small fragmented population in which individuals were confined to small keys, banks, or isolated islands in the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea. This hypothesis is contrary to the assumption that the species was widespread and abundant historically. The theory that the main driver of monk seal extinction was harvesting for its oil for use in the sugar cane industry of Jamaica during the 18th century is based primarily on anecdotal information and is overemphasized in the literature. An analysis of reported human encounters with this species indicates monk seal harvest was an occasional activity, rather than an ongoing enterprise. Nevertheless, given the rarity of this species and its restricted distribution, even small levels of hunting or specimen collecting must have contributed to its extinction, which was confirmed in the mid‐20th century. Some sources had been overlooked or only partially reviewed, others misinterpreted, and a considerable amount of anecdotal information had been uncritically used. Critical examination of archaeological and historical records is required to infer accurate estimations of the historical abundance of a species. In reconstructing the past to address the shifting baseline syndrome, it is important to avoid selecting evidence to confirm modern prejudices. Puntos de Referencia Cambiantes y la Extinción de la Foca Monje Caribeña     

Effects of the Presence of Official‐Looking Volunteers on Harassment of New Zealand Fur Seals

Abstract: An increased number of tourists viewing animals in the wild have increased stress on these animals (hereafter wildlife). Many wildlife‐viewing locations rely on voluntary compliance with posted regulations to protect animals from tourists because of the expense of employing on‐site enforcement personnel. Voluntary compliance, however, is ineffective. The presence of official‐looking volunteers may decrease the incidence of wildlife harassment by tourists. To test this possibility, we observed tourists interacting with 5‐ to 12‐month‐old New Zealand fur seals (Arctocephalus forsteri) at the popular Ohau Stream waterfall while in the absence or presence of a young woman in plain sight wearing a neon vest (i.e., observer) and when an observer was not present. We observed 254 tourist groups at the waterfall when young seals were present. The percentage of groups in which at least one person harassed (approached, touched, or threw objects) a young seal was two‐thirds lower when the official‐looking observer was present. Frequency of harassment was inversely related to observer presence. Programs in which volunteers work at tourist sites are popular in countries with high tourism rates, such as New Zealand. Our results show that a relatively inexpensive and effective tourism‐management strategy may be to post such volunteers as observers at sites where tourists view wildlife.     

Comparison of Outcomes of Permanently Closed and Periodically Harvested Coral Reef Reserves

Abstract: In many areas of the developing world, the establishment of permanent marine reserves is inhibited by cultural norms or socioeconomic pressures. Community conserved areas that are periodically harvested are increasingly being implemented as fisheries management tools, but few researchers have empirically compared them with permanently closed reserves. We used a hierarchal control‐impact experimental design to compare the abundance and biomass of reef fishes, invertebrates, and substrate composition in periodically harvested and permanent reserves and in openly fished (control sites) of the South Pacific island country of Vanuatu. Fished species had significantly higher biomass in periodically harvested reserves than in adjacent openly fished areas. We did not detect differences in substratum composition between permanent reserves and openly fished areas or between permanent reserves and periodically harvested reserves. Giant clams (tridacnids) and top shells (Trochus niloticus) were vulnerable to periodic harvest, and we suggest that for adequate management of these species, periodically harvested community conservation areas be used in conjunction with other management strategies. Periodic harvest within reserves is an example of adaptive and flexible management that may meet conservation goals and that is suited to the social, economic, and cultural contexts of many coastal communities in the developing world.