Regresar

Resumen del producto

Mouton, T.L., A., Gonzalez-Pestana, C.A., Rohner, R., Charles, E., García-Rodríguez, P.M., Kyne, A., Batlle-Morera, G.N., di Sciara, A.O., Armstrong, E., Acuña, J., Alfaro-Shigueto, R., Arauz, C.G., Avalos-Castillo, E., Augustinus, S., Bessudo, E., Barraza, C., Bustamante, E.J., Chávez, E.R., Espinoza, M., Espinoza, A., Hacohen-Domené, A.R., Hearn, G.M., Hernández, F., Galván-Magaña, J.A., Gonzalez-Leiva, J.T., Ketchum, F., Ladino, F., Lara-Lizardi, J.M., Morales-Saldaña, N., Morales Serrano, J., Madrigal-Mesén, P.A., Mejía-Falla, A.F., Navia, G.M., Ochoa, M.D., Palacios, C.R., Peñaherrera-Palma, F., Polanco-Vásquez, Y., Rodríguez-Arriatti, L.E., Saldaña-Ruiz, O., Sosa-Nishizaki, J., Tovar-Ávila, Á.J., Vega, X., Vélez-Zuazo, M., Villate-Moreno, I., Zanella & R.W., Jabado (2025). Shortfalls in the protection of Important Shark and Ray Areas undermine shark conservation efforts in the Central and South American Pacific. Marine Policy. 171: 106448. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106448.

Shortfalls in the protection of Important Shark and Ray Areas undermine shark conservation efforts in the Central and South American Pacific

Théophile L. Mouton 1, Adriana Gonzalez-Pestana 2, Christoph A. Rohner 1, Ryan Charles 1, Emiliano García-Rodríguez 1, Peter M. Kyne 3, Amanda Batlle-Morera 1, Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara 1, Asia O. Armstrong 4, Enzo Acuña 5, Joanna Alfaro-Shigueto 2, Randall Arauz 6, Cristopher G. Avalos-Castillo 7, Ely Augustinus 1, Sandra Bessudo 8, Enrique Barraza 9, Carlos Bustamante 1, Elpis J. Chávez 10, Eduardo Ramon Espinoza 11, Mario Espinoza 12, Ana Hacohen-Domené 13, Alex R. Hearn 14, Grettel M. Hernández 15, Felipe Galván-Magaña 16, José A. Gonzalez-Leiva 17, James T. Ketchum 18, Felipe Ladino 8, Frida Lara-Lizardi 19, Jorge Manuel Morales-Saldaña 1, Naití Morales Serrano 20, Jeffry Madrigal-Mesén 10, Paola A. Mejía-Falla 21, Andrés F. Navia 21, Gabriela M. Ochoa 22, Marta D. Palacios 23, César R. Peñaherrera-Palma 6, Francisco Polanco-Vásquez 24, Yehudi Rodríguez-Arriatti 25, Luz E. Saldaña-Ruiz 26, Oscar Sosa-Nishizaki 26, Javier Tovar-Ávila 27, Ángel J. Vega 27, Ximena Vélez-Zuazo 28, Melany Villate-Moreno 29, Ilena Zanella 30 y Rima W. Jabado 1

1 International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission Shark Specialist Group, Dubai
2 Facultad de Biología Marina, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru
3 Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University
4 School of Science, Technology and Engineering, University of the Sunshine Coast, Qld, Australia
5 Departamento de Biología Marina and Center for Ecology and Sustainable Management of Oceanic Islands (ESMOI), Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Católica del Norte, Chile
6 Migramar
7 Centro de Estudios del Mar y Acuicultura, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala
8 Fundación Malpelo y Otros Ecosistemas Marinos, Bogotá, Colombia
9 Dirección de Ecosistemas y Vida Silvestre, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, El Salvador
10 Centro Rescate de Especies Marinas Amenazadas (CREMA), San José, Costa Rica
11 Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INABIO) Quito, Ecuador
12 Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad de Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica
13 Biology Department, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala
14 Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ, Colegio de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales COCIBA
15 Instituto Nicaragüense de la Pesca y Acuicultura, Nicaragua
16 Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas, Departamento de pesquerías
17 Centro de Investigaciones Marinas y Limnológicas, Universidad Francisco Gavidia (CIMARyL-UFG), El Salvador
18 James T. Ketchum
19 ORGCAS, La Paz
20 Center for Ecology and Sustainable Management of Oceanic Islands (ESMOI), Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Católica del Norte, Coquimbo, Chile
21 Fundación colombiana para la investigación y conservación de tiburones y rayas, SQUALUS
22 Institute of Environment, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University
23 Mobula Conservation, La Paz
24 Wildlife Conservation Society, Guatemala
25 Shark Defenders, Ciudad de Panamá, Panama
26 Departamento de Oceanografía Biológica, Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada, Baja California (CICESE), Mexico
27 National Fisheries and Aquaculture Institute (INAPESCA), Mexico
28 Center for Conservation and Sustainability, Smithsonian National Zoological Park and Conservation Biology Institute
29 Fundación MarAdentro, Bahía Solano, Chocó, Colombia
30 Asociación Conservacionista Misión Tiburón, Costa Rica

Global biodiversity targets require nations to designate 30 % of their marine waters asprotected areas by 2030. Sharks, rays, and chimaeras (hereafter ‘sharks’) are key components ofaquatic ecosystems; however, over a third are globally threatened withextinction. Across the Central and South American Pacific Ocean region, we (i)assessed trends in Marine Protected Area (MPA) expansion and extent across the12 nations of the region; (ii) quantified the spatial overlap between MPAs andImportant Shark and Ray Areas (ISRAs); and (iii) evaluated the effectiveness ofthe current MPA governance structure at protecting sharks and their criticalhabitat. There has been a recent rapid increase in the establishment of MPAswith 90 % of current MPAs designatedsince 2010. Yet, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Honduras still protect lessthan 10 % of their waters. We findthat ISRAs overlap with all MPAs by only 15.6 % and with no-take MPAs by 7.3 %. This raises concerns about the low level of protectionafforded to critical shark habitats in the region. Of 182 MPAs identified, 41.8 % do not have a managementplan, comprising 39.8 % of the total MPA surface area. Mexico, Costa Rica, andColombia have relatively strong governance frameworks in place and, along withPanama, Honduras, and Ecuador, represent the highest overlap between MPAs andISRAs. However, the contribution of the remaining six countries to sharkprotection via MPAs is low based on limited spatial overlap with ISRAs (<2 %). As countries mobilise tomeet the 30×30 target, we propose considering ISRAs as a key component ofspatial planning when designing new MPAs, designating existing partiallyprotected areas as no-take zones, or reshaping the boundaries of existing MPAs.

Palabras clave: Area-based conservation; biodiversity; conservation; governance; Spatial planning; Chondrichthyes

Para obtener una copia del documento contacta la personal de la biblioteca a través del correo bibliocicimar{a}ipn.mx

Regresar