Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Marine protected areas show low overlap with projected distributions of seabird populations in Britain and Ireland

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Open Access Status

  • Embargoed (until 20/01/20)

Author(s)

Emma Jane Critchley, W. James Grecian, Adam Kane, Mark J. Jessopp, John L. Quinn

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are an important tool for the conservation of seabirds. However, mapping seabird distributions using at-sea surveys or tracking data to inform the designation of MPAs is costly and time-consuming, particularly for far-ranging pelagic species. Here we explore the potential for using predictive distribution models to examine the effectiveness of current MPAs for the conservation of seabirds, using Britain and Ireland as a case study. A distance-weighted foraging radius approach was used to project distributions at sea for an entire seabird community during the breeding season, identifying hotspots of highest density and species richness. The percentage overlap between distributions at sea and MPAs was calculated at the level of individual species, family group, foraging range group (coastal or pelagic foragers), and conservation status. On average, 32.5% of coastal populations and 13.2% of pelagic populations overlapped with MPAs indicating that pelagic species, many of which are threatened, are likely to have significantly less coverage from protected areas. We suggest that a foraging radius approach provides a pragmatic and rapid method of assessing overlap with MPA networks for central place foragers. It can also act as an initial tool to identify important areas for potential designation. This would be particularly useful for regions throughout the world with limited data on seabird distributions at sea and limited resources to collect this data. Future assessment for marine conservation management should account for the disparity between coastal and pelagic foraging species to ensure that wider-ranging seabirds are afforded adequate levels of protection.
Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)309-317
Number of pages9
JournalBiological Conservation
Volume224
Early online date20 Jun 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2018

    Research areas

  • Seabirds, Protected areas, Predictive modelling, Hotspots, Foraging, Ecosystem approach

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Understanding the ontogeny of foraging behaviour: insights from combining marine predator bio-logging with satellite-derived oceanography in hidden Markov models

    Grecian, W. J., Lane, J., Michelot, T., Wade, H. M. & Hamer, K. C., 6 Jun 2018, In : Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 15, 143, 9 p., 20180084.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Search and foraging behaviors from movement data: a comparison of methods

    Bennison, A., Bearhop, S., Bodey, T. W., Votier, S. C., Grecian, W. J., Wakefield, E. D., Hamer, K. C. & Jessopp, M., Jan 2018, In : Ecology and Evolution. 8, 1, p. 13-24 12 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. Man-made structures and Apex Predators: Spatial interactions and overlap (MAPS)

    Grecian, W. J., Masden, E. A., Hammond, P. S., Owen, E., Daunt, F., Wanless, S. & Russell, D. JF., Jan 2018, INSITE.

    Research output: Book/ReportCommissioned report

  4. Effects of age and reproductive status on individual foraging site fidelity in a long-lived marine predator

    Votier, S. C., Fayet, A. L., Bearhop, S., Bodey, T. W., Clark, B. L., Grecian, J., Guilford, T., Hamer, K. C., Jeglinski, J. W. E., Morgan, G., Wakefield, E. & Patrick, S. C., 26 Jul 2017, In : Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 284, 1859, 7 p., 20171068.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  5. Too close and too far: quantifying black rhino displacement and location error during research

    Plotz, R. D., Grecian, W. J., Kerley, G. I. H. & Linklater, W. L., 1 Apr 2017, In : African Journal of Wildlife Research. 47, 1, p. 47-58 12 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Related by journal

  1. Basin-scale distribution of harbour porpoises in the Baltic Sea provides basis for effective conservation actions

    Carlén, I., Thomas, L., Carlström, J., Amundin, M., Teilmann, J., Tregenza, N., Tougaard, J., Koblitz, J. C., Sveegaard, S., Wennerberg, D., Loisa, O., Dähne, M., Brundiers, K., Kosecka, M., Kyhn, L. A., Ljungqvist, C. T., Pawliczka, I., Koza, R., Arciszewski, B., Galatius, A. & 9 othersJabbusch, M., Laaksonlaita, J., Niemi, J., Lyytinen, S., Gallus, A., Benke, H., Blankett, P., Skóra, K. E. & Acevedo-Gutiérrez, A., Oct 2018, In : Biological Conservation. 226, p. 42-53 12 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Assessing the suitability of diversity metrics to detect biodiversity change

    Santini, L., Belmaker, J., Costello, M. J., Pereira, H. M., Rossberg, A. G., Schipper, A. M., Ceaușu, S., Dornelas, M., Hilbers, J. P., Hortal, J., Huijbregts, M. A. J., Navarro, L. M., Schiffers, K. H., Visconti, P. & Rondinini, C., Sep 2017, In : Biological Conservation. 213, Part B, p. 341-350 10 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. Microclimate variability and long-term persistence of fragmented woodland

    Davies, A. L., Smith, M. A., Froyd, C. A. & McCulloch, R. D., Sep 2017, In : Biological Conservation. 213, Part A, p. 95-105 10 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  4. Monitoring the biodiversity of regions: key principles and possible pitfalls

    Buckland, S. T. & Johnston, A., Oct 2017, In : Biological Conservation. 214, p. 23-34 12 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

ID: 253398489