Marine Protected Areas: Science,

Policy and Management John

Humphreys (Editor)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/marine-protected-areas-science-policy-and-managem
ent-john-humphreys-editor/
 MARINE
PROTECTED
AREAS
SCIENCE, POLICY AND
MANAGEMENT

Edited by

JOHN HUMPHREYS
Institute of Marine Sciences
University of Portsmouth
United Kingdom;
Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority
Poole, United Kingdom

ROBERT W.E. CLARK

Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority
Poole, United Kingdom
Elsevier
Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the
Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance
Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher
(other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden
our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become
necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and
using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or
methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom
they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any
liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or
otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the
material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-08-102698-4

For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at

https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Candice Janco

Acquisition Editor: Louisa Munro
Editorial Project Manager: Emily Thomson
Production Project Manager: Divya KrishnaKumar
Cover Designer: Miles Hitchen
Typeset by TNQ Technologies
 To
David and Kate
&
Kimber and Lyndon
 Contributors
Tundi Agardy Sound Seas, Bethesda, MD,
United States
Sophy Allen Natural England, Sterling House,
Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
David Allen Allen & Mellon Environmental
Ltd, Belfast, United Kingdom
Colin G. Attwood Department of Biological
Sciences, Marine Research Institute, University
of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape,
South Africa
Fernanda Balata Center for Coastal Economies,
New Economics Foundation, London, United
Kingdom
Alex N. Banks Natural England, Sterling House,
Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
M. Bedington Plymouth Marine Laboratory,
Plymouth, United Kingdom
Francis Binney States of Jersey, Department of
the Environment, Trinity, Jersey
Sarah E. Birchenough Southern Inshore Fish-
eries & Conservation Authority, Poole, United
Kingdom; School of Ocean and Earth Science,
University of Southampton, Southampton,
United Kingdom
Julie Black Joint Nature Conservation Com-
mittee, Inverdee House, Aberdeen, United
Kingdom
Samantha Blampied Societe Jersiaise, Marine
Biology Section, St. Helier, Jersey
Ian Bond Industry Nature Conservation Asso-
ciation, Redcar, North Yorkshire, United
Kingdom
Jessica Bone Centre for Conservation Ecology
and Environmental Sustainability, Department
of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of
Science and Technology, Bournemouth Uni-
versity, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom
xiii
Fiona Bowles Wessex Water, Bath, United
Kingdom
George M. Branch Department of Biological
Sciences, Marine Research Institute, University
of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape,
South Africa
Susan Burton Natural England, Dorchester,
Dorset, United Kingdom
Richard W.G. Caldow Natural England, Ster-
ling House, Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United
Kingdom
Alex J. Caveen RS Standards, Belfast, United
Kingdom
Paul Chambers States of Jersey, Department of
the Environment, Trinity, Jersey
I. Chapman Department of Life & Environ-
mental Sciences, Bournemouth University,
Poole, United Kingdom
Robert W.E. Clark Southern Inshore Fisheries and
Conservation Authority, Poole, United Kingdom
J.R. Clark Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Ply-
mouth, United Kingdom
Ken Collins Ocean and Earth Science, Uni-
versity of Southampton, National Ocean-
ography Centre, Southampton, UK
Laura H. Crossley School of Geography and
Environmental Science, University of South-
ampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
Ian W. Croudace GAU-Radioanalytical, Uni-
versity of Southampton, National Oceanography
Centre, Southampton, United Kingdom
Terence P. Dawson Department of Geography,
School of Global Affairs, King’s College
London, London, UK
John A. Dearing School of Geography and
Environmental Science, University of South-
ampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
xiv CONTRIBUTORS
Chantelle de Gruchy States of Jersey, Depart-
ment of the Environment, Trinity, Jersey
Kalli De Meyer Nature2, Bonaire, Dutch
Caribbean
Ian Durbach Department of Statistical Sciences,
Centre for Statistics in Ecology, Environment,
and Conservation, University of Cape Town,
Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa;
African Institute for Mathematical Sciences,
Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa
Sophie Elliott Museum National d’Histoire
Naturelle (MNHN), Station Marine de Dinard,
Dinard, France
Ken Findlay CPUT Research Chair: Oceans
Economy, Cape Peninsula University of Tech-
nology, Cape Town, Western Cape, South
Africa
Stephen Fletcher UN Environment World
Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge,
United Kingdom
Paulo A.C. Flores Anhatomirim EPA, Chico
Mendes Institute for Conservation and Bio-
diversity (ICMBio/MMA), Florianópolis, Santa
Catarina, Brazil
Daniel J. Franklin Department of Life and
Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and
Technology, Bournemouth University, Talbot
Campus, Poole, United Kingdom
Tim Frayling Natural England, Sterling House,
Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
J.D. Goss-Custard Life and Environmental Sci-
ences, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow,
Poole, United Kingdom
S.M. Grant British Antarctic Survey, Natural
Environment Research Council, Cambridge,
United Kingdom
Victoria Jane Gravestock Southern Inshore
Fisheries and Conservation Authority, Poole,
Dorset, United Kingdom
Jean M. Harris Institute for Coastal and Marine
Research, Nelson Mandela University, Port
Elizabeth, Eastern Cape, South Africa; WILD-
TRUST, Hilton, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Andrew Harwood ECON Ecological Con-
sultancy Ltd, Norwich, Norfolk, United
Kingdom
Roger J.H. Herbert Centre for Conservation
Ecology and Environmental Sustainability,
Department of Life and Environmental Sciences,
Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth
University, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom
Amy Hill Senior Solicitor, Chapman Tripp,
Christchurch, New Zealand
Keith Hiscock Marine Biological Association of
the UK, Plymouth, United Kingdom
Malcolm D. Hudson Centre for Environmental
Science, School of Geography and Environ-
mental Science, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
Stephen Hull ABPmer, Southampton, United
Kingdom
John Humphreys Institute of Marine Scien-
ces, University of Portsmouth, United
Kingdom; Southern Inshore Fisheries and
Conservation Authority, Poole, United
Kingdom
Robert A. Irving Sea-Scope Marine Environ-
mental Consultants, Dulverton, Somerset, UK
Simon J Cripps Dorset Wildlife Trust, Brook-
lands Farm, Forston, Dorset, United Kingdom
Gareth Jeffreys Societe Jersiaise, Marine Biol-
ogy Section, St. Helier, Jersey
Magnus L. Johnson School of Environmental
Sciences, University of Hull, Hull, United
Kingdom
Inti Keith Charles Darwin Research Station,
Charles Darwin Foundation, Puerto Ayora,
Galapagos, Ecuador
Mel Kershaw Natural England, Sterling House,
Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
Peter Langdon School of Geography and Envi-
ronmental Science, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
Durwyn Liley Footprint Ecology, Forest Office,
Wareham, Dorset, United Kingdom
 CONTRIBUTORS
Amanda T. Lombard Institute for Coastal and
Marine Research, Nelson Mandela University,
Port Elizabeth, Eastern Cape, South Africa
Heitor S. Macedo Anhatomirim EPA, Chico
Mendes Institute for Conservation and Bio-
diversity (ICMBio/ MMA), Florianópolis,
Santa Catarina, Brazil; Center for Studies in
Fisheries Systems and Marine Protected Areas,
Center of Sea Studies, Federal University of
Paraná e NESPAMP/CEM/UFPR, Pontal do
Sul, Paraná, Brazil
Duncan MacRae Coastal Zone Management
(UK), Fortrose, United Kingdom
Judy Mann-Lang Oceanographic Research
Institute, South African Association for Marine
Biological Research, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal,
South Africa
Bruce Q. Mann Oceanographic Research Insti-
tute, South African Association for Marine
Biological Research, Durban, KwaZulu-Natal,
South Africa
Heike Markus-Michalczyk NIOZ Royal Neth-
erlands Institute for Sea Research, Department
of Estuarine and Delta Systems, and Utrecht
University, Yerseke, The Netherlands
Neil McCulloch Northern Ireland Environment
Agency, Belfast, United Kingdom
Kevin McIlwee Societe Jersiaise, Marine Biol-
ogy Section, St. Helier, Jersey
Rodrigo P. Medeiros Center for Studies in
Fisheries Systems and Marine Protected Areas,
Center of Sea Studies, Federal University of
Paraná e NESPAMP/CEM/UFPR, Pontal do
Sul, Paraná, Brazil
S.B. Mitchell School of Civil Engineering and
Surveying, University of Portsmouth, Ports-
mouth, UK
Greg Morel States of Jersey, Department of the
Environment, Trinity, Jersey
Thomas Mullier Marine Mapping, Exeter, UK
Matthew Murphy Natural Resources Wales,
Bangor, Wales, United Kingdom
Rosie Nicoll Southern Inshore Fisheries and
Conservation Authority, Poole, Dorset, United
Kingdom
xv
Patrick E. Osborne Centre for Environmental
Science, School of Geography and Environ-
mental Science, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
Mia Pantzar Institute for European Environ-
mental Policy (IEEP), London, United Kingdom
Simon Pengelly Southern Inshore Fisheries &
Conservation Authority, Poole, United
Kingdom
Martin R. Perrow ECON Ecological Con-
sultancy Ltd, Norwich, Norfolk, United
Kingdom
D.A. Purdie Ocean and Earth Science, National
Oceanography Centre Southampton, Uni-
versity of Southampton Waterfront Campus,
Southampton, United Kingdom
Alice S.J. Puritz-Evans Planning Associate,
CMS UK, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Dale P. Rodmell National Federation of Fish-
ermen’s Organisations, York, United Kingdom
Kathryn Ross Centre for Conservation Ecology
and Environmental Sustainability, Department
of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of
Science and Technology, Bournemouth Uni-
versity, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom ; British
Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford,
Norfolk, United Kingdom; Toi Ohomai Insti-
tute of Technology, Mokoia Drive, Tihiotonga,
Rotorua, New Zealand
Helen Rowell Natural England, Sterling House,
Dix’s Field, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
Daniela Russi Institute for European Environ-
mental Policy, London, United Kingdom
Jessica M. Savage Global Sustainable Develop-
ment, School for Cross Faculty Studies, Uni-
versity of Warwick, Coventry, Warwickshire,
United Kingdom
David Sear School of Geography and Environ-
mental Science, University of Southampton,
Southampton, United Kingdom
Emma Sheehan University of Plymouth,
Plymouth, UK
Jean-Luc Solandt Marine Conservation Society,
Ross-on-Wye, UK
xvi CONTRIBUTORS

Walter Steenbock Center for Fisheries Research R.J. Uncles Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Ply-
and Management (CEPSUL), Chico Mendes mouth, United Kingdom
Institute for Conservation and Biodiversity Nick Underdown The Open Seas Trust,
(ICMBio/ MMA), Itajaí, Santa Catarina, Brazil Pitlochry, United Kingdom
Richard A. Stillman Life and Environmental Duncan Vaughan Natural England, Peter-
Sciences, Bournemouth University, Fern Bar- borough, United Kingdom
row, Poole, United Kingdom
Talwyn Whetter School of Geography, Birkbeck
Phil Taylor The Open Seas Trust, Pitlochry, College, University of London, Bloomsbury,
United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Ann Thornton Conservation Science Group, A. Willcocks Department of Life & Environ-
Department of Zoology, University of Cam- mental Sciences, Bournemouth University,
bridge, The David Attenborough Building, Poole, United Kingdom
Cambridge, United Kingdom; Department of
Chris Williams Center for Coastal Economies,
Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of
New Economics Foundation, London, United
Science and Technology, Bournemouth Uni-
Kingdom
versity, Talbot Campus, Poole, United Kingdom
Ilka Win Joint Nature Conservation Commit-
Peter Tinsley Dorset Wildlife Trust, Dorset,
tee, Inverdee House, Aberdeen, United
United Kingdom
Kingdom
R. Torres Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Ply-
Lewis Yates Birmingham, United Kingdom
mouth, United Kingdom
P.N. Trathan British Antarctic Survey, Natural
Environment Research Council, Cambridge,
United Kingdom
 Foreword: Progress towards the
conservation and sustainable use of
the oceans: targets and challenges
Stephen Fletcher
UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Introduction
It is widely recognized that the ocean is
facing unprecedented pressure from a com-
bination of increased demand for living
and non-living resources and climate-
driven large-scale temperature and chemical
shifts. These are causing significant changes
to ocean ecosystems and increasing the
vulnerability of human communities that
depend upon the ocean. Even the deep ocean
in areas beyond national jurisdiction, which
has historically been protected by its remote-
ness, is affected by these changes. The press-
ing need to act to address these global
changes was captured by Ban Ki-moon in
2016, when he stated that ‘it is clear that ur-
gent action on a global scale is needed to pro-
tect the world’s oceans from the many
pressures they face’ (UN, 2016). There are
global targets in place for the conservation
and sustainable use of the ocean, most
notably within the Aichi Biodiversity Targets
and Sustainable Development Goals, which
are driving action. A particular focus of these
targets is the proportion of the ocean covered
by marine protected areas, which is used as a
measure of protection and sustainable use.
This short foreword reviews global progress
xvii
towards key ocean area-based protection tar-
gets and reflects on the value of area-based
targets as a measure of conservation
ambition.
Global targets and processes
The two main area-based ocean conserva-
tion targets arise from the Convention on
Biological Diversity’s Strategic Plan for
Biodiversity 2011e20 and the UN Sustain-
able Development Goals.
Aichi biodiversity targets
In the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011
e20, Aichi Biodiversity target 11 is defined
as:
By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and
inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and
marine areas, especially areas of particular
importance for biodiversity and ecosystem ser-
vices, are conserved through effectively and
equitably managed, ecologically representative
and well-connected systems of protected areas
and other effective area-based conservation
measures, and integrated into the wider land-
scapes and seascapes.
xviii FOREWORD: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF THE OCEANS
This target is multi-faceted and contains
quantitative and qualitative elements. The
quantitative element seeks marine protected
area coverage of 10% of coastal and marine
areas by 2020. In quantitative terms, initially
the target appears to be straightforward,
although for many it has created ambiguity
over the definition of ‘coastal and marine’.
For instance, if ‘coastal and marine’ is
defined as the global ocean, then the target
is far more challenging than ocean located
within national jurisdiction. The qualitative
elements pose more difficulties, as they
specify that the 10% coverage must be ‘of
particular importance for biodiversity and
ecosystem services’, be ‘effectively and equi-
tably managed’, be ‘ecologically representa-
tive’ and part of a ‘well connected systems
of protected areas and other effective area-
based conservation measures’ (Rees et al.,
2018). Proof of the achievement of all qualita-
tive elements of target 11 is likely to be diffi-
cult to obtain, which may result in target 11
proving difficult to unequivocally claim suc-
cess against. It is possible to imagine a sce-
nario in which the quantitative coverage
target is met, but there is disagreement
over the extent to which the qualitative
criteria are met.
A particular focus of debate is the mean-
ing of ‘other effective area-based conserva-
tion measures’ (OECM). To date, the
contribution of these areas to Aichi target
11 has been under-reported due to the
absence of clear guidelines as to what consti-
tutes OECM. However, in 2018, the IUCN
World Commission on Protected Areas is-
sued guidelines defining OECMs as ‘a
geographically defined space, not recognized
as a protected area, which is governed and
managed over the long-term in ways that
deliver the effective in-situ conservation of
biodiversity, with associated ecosystem ser-
vices and cultural and spiritual values’
(IUCN WCPA, 2018). For example, fully
protected ship wrecks can qualify as OECMs
as they deliver in-situ biodiversity conserva-
tion benefits despite their primary motive be-
ing heritage conservation. The guidelines go
on to state that ‘the distinguishing criterion is
that protected areas should have a primary
conservation objective, whereas an OECM
should deliver the effective in-situ conserva-
tion of biodiversity, regardless of its objec-
tives’ (IUCN WCPA, 2018). The agreed
definition of OECMs will enable many areas
not currently considered as marine protected
areas to contribute to Aichi Target 11.
Sustainable development goals
The 17 Sustainable Development Goals
were adopted as part of the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development in September
2015. The Goals recognize that ‘ending
poverty and other deprivations must go
hand-in-hand with strategies that improve
health and education, reduce inequality,
and spur economic growth e all while tack-
ling climate change and working to preserve
our oceans and forests’ (UN, online a). As
such, the goals are all interconnected and
dependent upon partnerships between coun-
tries, businesses, NGOs, and citizens. Sus-
tainable Development Goal 14 ‘Life Below
Water’ specifically focuses on the ocean,
with the overall goal to ‘conserve and sus-
tainably use the oceans, seas and marine re-
sources for sustainable development’ (UN,
online a). Target 14.5 requires that:
‘By 2020, conserve at least 10% of coastal and
marine areas, consistent with national and inter-
national law and based on the best available sci-
entific information’ which will be measured by
‘coverage of protected areas in relation to marine
areas’ (UN, online b).
The quantitative element of target 14.5 is
intentionally aligned with Aichi Target 11,
as demonstrated by the coverage targets
 FOREWORD: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF THE OCEANS
and end dates for both being the same. Crit-
ically however, Target 14.5 is simpler than
Aichi Target 11, in that it declares a quantita-
tive target and specifies that protected areas
must be legal and evidence-based but in-
cludes none of the other qualitative elements
present in Aichi Target 11. The achievement
of Target 14.5 will therefore be easier to
prove than Aichi Target 11.
Conservation of biodiversity in areas
beyond national jurisdiction
In addition to the global area-based tar-
gets, the other key process to enhance global
ocean conservation is the ‘Intergovernmental
Conference on an international legally bind-
ing instrument under the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea on the
conservation and sustainable use of marine
biological diversity of areas beyond national
jurisdiction’. This is a critically important
process, as areas beyond national jurisdiction
are significant for biodiversity, yet at present
have fragmented governance arrangements
which undermine their limited protection.
The conference was initiated by UN General
Assembly resolution 72/249 and is exploring
the formulation of a new legal instrument to
cover the following topics in areas beyond
national jurisdiction:
• marine genetic resources, including ques-
tions on benefit-sharing;
• environmental impact assessments;
• measures such as area-based manage-
ment tools, including marine protected
areas; and
• capacity building and marine technology
transfer.
The outcome of this conference has the
potential to make dramatic changes to ocean
conservation. Most notably, at present, there
are very few marine protected areas in areas
beyond national jurisdiction as the current
xix
legal framework makes their designation
difficult. The introduction of a new legal in-
strument with the power to designate ma-
rine protected areas in areas beyond
national jurisdiction is likely to create a
step-change in the ocean conservation and
unleash a suite of new marine protected
areas. Substantial work has already been un-
dertaken by the Convention on Biological Di-
versity and partners to identify Ecologically
or Biologically Significant Marine Areas,
including in areas beyond national jurisdic-
tion. While these areas have no formal pro-
tection status, they do identify areas
worthy of protection when a legal means is
available to do so.
Performance against targets
The designation of marine protected areas
has accelerated rapidly since 2006 when only
just over only 1% of the global ocean was
protected. Yet by January 2019, over 14,000
marine protected areas had been designated
globally, covering over 27 million km2. This
represents 7.44% of the global ocean, or just
over 17.4% of coastal and marine areas
within national jurisdiction and 1.18% of
areas beyond national jurisdiction. The des-
ignations have been driven by the expansion
of existing protected areas and the designa-
tion of new, often very large, protected areas.
For example, the Marae Moana Marine Park
in the Cook Islands was designated in 2017
covering 1.97 million km2. However, the
largest single marine protected area is the
Ross Sea Region Marine Protected Area,
which covers 2.06 million km2. The trend to-
wards large marine protected areas means
that the 20 largest marine protected areas
(of the 14,000 designated) together account
for approximately 65% of the total area pro-
tected. Many nations have also pledged to
increase their marine protected area
xx FOREWORD: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF THE OCEANS
networks. For example, the UN Ocean Con-
ference in 2017, which focused on generating
political action to deliver Sustainable Devel-
opment Goal 14, resulted in pledges to desig-
nate a further 17.6 million km2 of new
marine protected areas. The total additional
area of marine protected areas currently
pledged by nations is 26.7 million km2,
which when formally designated will effec-
tively double the current marine protected
area coverage.
Fig. 1 shows the global distribution of ma-
rine protected areas. This map shows marine
protected areas designated by governments
only. It does not include OECMs or pledged
areas, nor does it include any consideration
of the management effectiveness of the ma-
rine protected areas displayed.
The management effectiveness of marine
protected areas is a critical and contentious
issue for both designated and pledged sites.
It is a critical issue because ineffective marine
FIG. 1 Official map showing global distribution of marine protected areas (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2019).
protected areas will not meaningfully
contribute to global conservation efforts or
targets. It is contentious as some commenta-
tors suggest that ineffective marine protected
areas (such as those without management
plans) are designated out of political expedi-
ency to be seen to contribute to global tar-
gets. Similar accusations have been made
towards the designation of large marine pro-
tected areas around remote islands, which
arguably face comparatively few pressures,
but allow nations to demonstrate substantial
contributions to national and global conser-
vation targets. The marine protected area
coverage targets are therefore not straight-
forward and require considerable interpreta-
tion in order to obtain a clear picture of
progress towards their achievement. Howev-
er, the target date of 2020 is fast approaching
and attention is turning to what will replace
the current system of target driven marine
conservation.
 FOREWORD: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF THE OCEANS
Post-2020 biodiversity agenda
The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011
e20, Aichi Biodiversity targets, and some
of the Sustainable Development Goal targets
(including target 14.5) expire in 2020. In
practical terms, this means that the 10% ma-
rine protected area target embedded in both
Aichi target 11 and SDG target 14.5 will be
replaced. In broad terms, the Strategic Plan
for Biodiversity 2011e20 will be replaced
by a new ‘biodiversity framework’ that will
contribute to achieving the 2050 Vision of
‘Living in harmony with nature’ where ‘by
2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved,
restored and wisely used, maintaining
ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy
planet and delivering benefits essential for
all people’ (UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2,
2010).
There are strong and competing views
about what should replace the current 10%
marine protected area target. Some views
focus on the need to increase the coverage
target, with up to 50% protection advocated
by some. However, an emerging consensus
amongst conservation bodies appears to be
a target of 30% coverage of marine protected
areas by 2030. In contrast, others argue that
any coverage target will fail to recognize
the importance of management effectiveness
and carries the risk of incentivizing politi-
cally expedient designations. At the time of
writing, the approach to be taken by the
world’s nations to marine conservation for
xxi
the next decade remains unclear. However,
the decisions taken in the lead up to 2020
will undoubtedly fundamentally influence
the extent to which human society can
respond to the challenges facing the global
ocean, which will have implications for
everyone.
References
IUCN WCPA, 2018. Guidelines for Recognising and
Reporting Other Effective Area-Based Conservation
Measures. IUCN, Switzerland. Version 1.
Rees, S.E., Foster, N.L., Langmead, O., Pittman, S.,
Johnson, D.E., 2018. Defining the qualitative ele-
ments of Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 with regard to
the marine and coastal environment in order to
strengthen global efforts for marine biodiversity
conservation outlined in the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goal 14. Marine Policy 93,
241e250. ISSN 0308-597X. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.marpol.2017.05.016.
UN, 2016. World Ocean Assessment. http://www.
worldoceanassessment.org.
UN, Online, a. Sustainable Development Goals. https://
Sustainabledevelopment.Un.Org/Sdgs.
UN, Online, b. Sustainable Development Goal 14.
https://Sustainabledevelopment.Un.Org/Sdg14.
UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2, October 29, 2010. The
Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the
Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Conference of the Parties
to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Tenth
Meeting Nagoya, Japan, 18-29 October 2010 Agenda
Item 4.4.
UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, February 2019. Marine Pro-
tected Planet [On-Line]. UNEP-WCMC and IUCN,
Cambridge, UK. Available at: www.protectedplanet.
net.
 Preface
If asked to caricature the policy and man-
agement of marine protected areas (MPAs)
we would be inclined to draw a spectrum
with three overlapping zones of activity. On
the management end are thousands of prac-
titioners trying hard to implement effective
MPAs, often succeeding despite inadequate
resources. At the other end are a wide range
of global and regional technocrats in inter-
governmental organisations, and NGO lob-
byists jostling for position or influence in the
policy processes which determine what
MPAs really are about and what proportion
of the sea should be protected by them. In the
middle are the governments of sovereign
states desperately trying to achieve targets
that they signed up to as a result of a great
international congress, without alienating too
many of their citizens one way or the other.
All along the spectrum scientists are busy.
Sometimes acting strictly as scientists, but
often also lobbying or directly engaged in the
policy or management processes as well.
Occasionally a representative of other in-
terests (most often fishing) is spotted, but
these ‘stakeholders’ are more often found off-
spectrum, exerting their influence locally in
consultation exercises and ‘co-management’
committees, or for more powerful players, in
the corridors of power. On and around our
spectrum we assume all of the actors are
intelligent, committed and acting in good
faith, but they also have differing perspec-
tives and the decisions reached are almost
always contentious and essentially political.
Yet like all the environmental issues of the
Anthropocene epoch, the results are crucial
xxiii
for biodiversity, ecosystems and human
welfare.
In this book we have sought to capture a
range of perspectives and conclusions
through the contributions of people directly
involved in the science, policy and manage-
ment of marine protected areas. The book is
far from uncritical. In addition to analyses of
the causes of success authors also elucidate
challenges, frustrations, failures and cri-
tiques. In doing so they provide informed
insights with implications for the future of
marine protected areas.
Geographical perspectives include both
neritic and oceanic realms and range across
the Pacific, Indian, Atlantic and Southern
Ocean systems. Nevertheless common issues
and themes emerge. Many chapters demon-
strate how those professionally involved with
MPAs must routinely act across our three
eponymous disciplines. Consequently we
must ask the forgiveness of authors for shoe-
horning their work into one or other of the
books three parts, when their contribution
spans two or even all of them. To organize
the book we have as a rule of thumb located
contributions on single sites in the manage-
ment section, however for reasons which we
hope the reader will appreciate we have not
been entirely consistent with this approach.
Within our three parts we have arranged
chapters which are obviously related in some
way next to each in the sequence. This is
most conspicuous in the science part of
the book in which we cluster four chapters
(35e38) which deal with aspects of the
eutrophication of a heavily protected
xxiv
estuarine MPA in southern England. In fact
the last of these is not scientific in character
but obviously belongs with the other three.
This cluster exemplifies the extreme perme-
ability of MPA boundaries to extraneous
causes of environmental degradation, and
how MPA management must often rely on
conservation efforts managed through other
distinct initiatives.
At the end of the book we offer a final
chapter with some suggestions on how
PREFACE
aspects of science, policy and management
could develop to enhance the utility of MPAs
in marine conservation. This chapter is not
synoptic in any sense and represents only
what we as editors have taken from the
process of creating the book. As such while it
does not represent the views of our authors it
is informed by the wide range of geograph-
ical and professional perspectives that they
so ably exemplify.
 Acknowledgements
The initiative for this book came from a
conference in Poole, UK at the eastern end of
the ‘Jurassic Coast’ World Heritage Site and
overlooking a large multi-designation MPA.
The conference was held under the joint
auspices of the Estuarine & Coastal Sciences
Association and the Poole Harbour Study
Group. We are grateful to our colleagues on
the conference organizing committee, espe-
cially Dr Alice Hall, and all who contributed.
Thanks also to our major conference spon-
sors including Natural England, the Envi-
ronment Agency, Bournemouth University,
Poole Harbour Commissioners, Dorset
Wildlife Trust and the Southern Inshore
Fisheries & Conservation Authority (SIFCA).
We must also thank all the members
(technical and political) of the statutory au-
thority (SIFCA) we both serve. There is no
xxv
doubt that the diverse perspectives and well
informed deliberations of these members
have profoundly informed our own knowl-
edge of the realities of MPA science, policy
and management. Similarly we thank the
commercial fishers and other stakeholders
on the English south coast who have also
provided us with many invaluable insights,
not least Gary Wordsworth of Othniel Oys-
ters whose analysis we borrowed in our
concluding chapter.
At Elsevier we thank Emily Thompson for
project managing the book so effectively,
Louisa Munro our commissioning editor and
Divya KrishnaKumar our Production Project
Manager.
Above all we wish to thank all our
authors.
 List of abbreviations

AA Average accuracy
AAS Acetylsalicylic acid
ABLM Adaptative bilinear modeling
ABS Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene
ADSI Angular domain spectroscopic imaging
AE Automatic emulation
AEB Automated endmembers bundles
AFM Atomic force microscopy
AGAPE Automatic Gaussian process emulator
AGM Automated Gaussian model
AIS Airborne Imaging Spectrometer
ALA Average leaf angle inclination
ALI Advanced land imager
ALLUT Adaptative linearized lookup trees
ALS Alternating least squares
ALS Airborne laser scanning
AM Additive manufacturing
AMD Age-related macular degeneration
AMOGAPE Automatic multi-output Gaussian process emulator
ANC Abundance non-negativity constraint
ANFO Ammonium nitrate fuel oil
ANN Artificial neural networks
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
AO Artery-only
AOTF Acousto-optic tunable filter
AP Attribute profiles
API Active principal ingredient
ARI Anthocyanin reflectance index
ARVI Atmospherically resistant vegetation index
ASC Abundance sum-to-one constraint
ASCA Anova-Simultaneous component analysis
AsLS Assymetric least squares
ATM Automatic teller machine
ATR Attenuated total reflection
AUC Area under the curve
AVIRIS Airbone visible infrared imaging spectrometer
BCM Beta compositional model
BF Bilateral filter
BGS Brilliant green sulfa
BIL Band interleaved by line format
BIP Band interleaved by pixel format
BP-ANN Back propagation artificial neural networks
BPT Binary partition tree
BRDF Bi-directional reflectance distribution function
BSQ Band sequential format
BSS Blind source separation

xxvii
xxviii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BTF Bilateral texture filter

C&DW Construction and demolition waste
CALIC Context-based Adaptative lossless image codec
CAR Carotenoid content
CARS Coherent anti-stokes Raman scattering
CBD Convention on biological diversity
Cbr Brown pigments content
CCD Charge-coupled device
CD Chlorophyll density per unit area
CFU Colony forming units
CGH Computer-generated hologram
CH Cultural Heritage
Chl Leaf chlorophyll content
CHM Canopi height model
CI Chemical imaging
CI Conifer index
CI Chlorophyll index
CLS Classical least squares
CLSM Confocal laser scanning microscopy
CLSU Constrained least squares unmixing
Cm Dry matter content
CMOS Complementary metal oxide semiconductor
CPU Central Processing Unit
CRI Carotenoid reflectance index
CRISM Compact reconnaissance imaging spectrometer on Mars
CRISTAL Comprehensive reflectance inversion based on spectrum matching and table lookup
CRM Confocal Raman microscopy
CS Component substitution
CS Hydroxypropyltrimonium chitosan
CTIS Computed tomographic imaging spectroscopy
CV Cross validation
Cw Water content
CWL Ceter wavelength
DBH Diameter at breast height
DCT Discrete cosine transform
DEM Digital elevation model
DFC Data fusion contest
DI Deionized
DLP Digital light processing
DMD Multispectral digital microscope
DMD Digital micro-mirror
DR Dimensionality reduction
DSM Digital surface model
DTC Deterministic training conditional
DTD Direct trilinear decomposition
DTRF Domain transform recursive filter
DVI Difference vegetation index
DWT Discrete wavelet transform
EAP Extended attribute profile
EBV Essential biodiversity variables
ECOC Error Correcting Output Coding
EDP Edge Direction Prediction
EEA Endmember extraction algorithm
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxix
EEM Excitation-emission fluorescence measurements
ELMM Extended linear mixing model
ELS Extended least squares
EMAP Extended multi-attribute profile
EMCCD Electron multiplying charge-coupled device
EMSC Extended multiplicative scatter correction
EO Earth observation
EOS Earth observing system
EPF Edge-preserving filtering/features
EPO External parameter orthogonalization
ERGAS Erreur Globale Adimensionnelle de Synthèse
ERMES Earth observation model based rice information service
EVI Enhanced vegetation index
EWT Equivalent water thickness
FAB Fastidious anaerobe broth
FAD Favin adenine dinucleotide
fAPAR fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation
FCLSU Fully constrained least squares unmixing
FCM Fuzzy C-Means
FDN Fisher discriminant nullspace
FFS Forward feature selection
FITC Fully independent training conditional
FLEX Fluorescence explorer
FORS Fiber Optics Reflectance Spectroscopy
FOV Field of view
FPA Focal plane array
FPGA Field programme gate arrays
FR-KNN Features ranking k nearest neighbors
FSIW-EFA/FSW-EFA Fixed size image window-evolving factor analysis
FTIR/FT-IR Fourier transform infrared
FT-NIR Fourier transfer near infrared
FVC Fractional vegetation cover
FWHM Filter width at half maximum
GBM Gradient boosted machine
GCeMS Gas chromatography mass spectrometry
GCP Ground control points
GF Guided filter
GFP Green fluorescent protein
GFPO Guided filtering based probability optimization
GFR Glomerular filtration rate
GHG Green house gasses
GI Green Index
GLCM Gray-level co-occurrence matrix
GLP Generalized Laplacian pyramid
GLS Generalized least squares
GMES Global monitoring for environment and security
GNDVI Green normalized difference vegetation index
GP Gaussian process
GPR Gaussian process regression
GPU Graphics processing units
GRSS Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society
GS Gram-Schmidt
GSA Gram-Schmidt adaptative
xxx LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

GSD Group sample distance

GSR Gunshot residues
GT Ground Truth
GUI Graphical user interface
HCA Hierarchical cluster analysis
HDPE High density polyethylene
HEM Hemorrhagic shock
HGF Hierarchical guidance filtering based ensemble classifier
HIPPS High-impact polystyrene
HiRISE High resolution Imaging science experiment
HNC Head and neck cancer
HPC High-performance computing
HPLC High performance liquid chromatography
HPM High pass modulation
HQNR Hybrid quality without no reference
HS/HSI Hyperspectral imaging
HSM Hyperspectral macroscope
HSR Higher spectral resolution
HSV Hue-Saturation-value
HYDICE Hyperspectral digital imagery collection experiment
HyspIRI Hyperspectral infrared imager
HyTES Hyperspectral thermal emission spectrometer
IASI Infrared atmospheric sounding interferometer
ICA Independent component analysis
ICCD Intensified charge-coupled device
ICE Iterated constrained endmembers
ICM Intrinsic coregionalization model
IEEE Institute of electrical and electronics engineers
IFOV Instantaneous field of view
IFRF Image fusion and recursive filtering method
IGBP International geosphere biosphere programme
ILS Inverse least squares
IPCC International panel on climate change
IPVI Infrared percentage vegetation index
IQI Internal quality index
IR Infrared
IRR Infrared Reflectography
ITC Individual tree crown
JGP Joint Gaussian process
JPEG2000 Joint Photographic Experts Group
JPG-LS Joint Photographic Experts Group - Lossless
KL Kullback-Leibler divergence
KLT Karhunen-Loève transform
kNN/k-NN k nearest neighbors
KPCA Kernel-Principal component analysis
KS Kaposi’s sarcoma
KSFA Key Set Factor Analysis
LAB Lactic acid bacteria
LAI Leaf area index
LB Lysogeny broth
LC Liquid crystal
LCTF Liquid crystal tuneable filters
LDA Linear discriminant analysis
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxxi
LDPE Low density polyethylene
LED Light emitting diode
LFM Latent force model
LHS Latin hypercube sampling
LIBS Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging/Laser Imaging, Detection and Ranging
LMA Leaf mass per area
LMC Linear model of coregionalization
LMM Linear mixture model
LOCO-I Low-Complexity Lossless Compression for Images
LOF Lack of fit
LOO leave-one-out
LPF Low-pass filter
LPN Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy
LPVQ Local optimal partitioned vector quantization
LS-SVM Least squares support vector machine
LSU Local spectral unmixing
LTI Linear time-invariant
LUT Look-up table
LV Latent variable
LWIR Longwave infrared region
M/SVQ Mean/shape vector quantization
MA Maximum Angle
MATLAB Matrix laboratory
MA-XRF-SR Synchrotron-based macro X-ray fluorescence
MBW Marker-based watershed
M-CALIC Variation of CALIC algorithm
MCARI Modified chlorophyll absorption in reflectance
MCR Multivariate curve resolution
MCR-ALS Multivariate curve resolution-Alternating least squares
MCR-WALS Multivariate curve resolution-Weighted alternating least squares
MDC Multispectral digital colposcopy
MERIS Medium resolution imaging spectrometer
MESMA Multiple endmember spectral mixture analysis
MGM Modified Gaussian model
MHSI Medical hyperspectral imaging
MI Mutual information
MIA Multivariate Image Analysis
MIR Mid infrared/Middle infrared
MLE Maximum Likelihood Estimator
MLR Multiple linear regression
MLRA Machine learning regression algorithm
MMPs Matrix by matrix metalloproteinases
MNDVI Modified normalized difference vegetation index
mNDVI705 Modified red-edge normalized difference vegetation index
MNF Minimum noise fraction
M-NVQ Mean-normalized Vector Quantization
MODIS Moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometers
MOF Metal-organic framework
MP Macular pigment
MRA Multi-resolution analysis
MS Mass spectrometry
MS/MSI Multispectral imaging
xxxii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

MSAVI Modified soil-adjusted vegetation index

MSC Multiplicative scatter correction
MSE Mean square error
mSR Modified red edge simple ratio index
MTF Modulation transfer function
MTF-GLP Modulation transfer function-generalized Laplacian pyramid
MTF-GLP-HPM Modulation transfer function-generalized Laplacian pyramid-high pass modulation
MTVI Modified triangular vegetation index
MVE Minimum volume ellipsoid
NADH Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide
NB Narrow band
NCM Normal compositional model
NDSI Normalized difference snow index
NDVI Normalized difference vegetation index
N-FINDR Endmember finder
NIMS Near infrared mapping spectrometer
NIR Near infrared
NLSU Nonlinear spectral unmixing
NMF Non-negative matrix factorization
NMR Nuclear magnetic resonance
NMSE Normalized mean squared error
N-PLS Multiway partial least squares
NPs Nanoparticles
OA Overall accuracy
OLS Orthogonal least squares
ONH Optic nerve head
OPA Orthogonal projection approach
OPD Optical path difference
OPN Open partial nephrectomy
OPR Orthogonal polarized reflectance
OSAVI Optimization of soil-adjusted vegetation index
OTF Optical transfer function
OTFP On-the-fly-processing
PAD Peripheral arterial disease
PAN Panchromatic
PARAFAC Parallel factor analysis
PAT Process analytical technologies
PC Principal component
PC Polycarbonate
PCA Principal component analysis
PCA-LDA Principal component analysis - Linear discriminant analysis
PCB Printed circuit boards
PCR Principal component regression
PCR Polymerase chain reaction
PCs Principal components
PCS Principal component substitution
PCS Point cloud segmentation
PEFF Paraffin-embedded formalin-fixed
PEG Poly ethylene glycol
PET Positron emission tomography
PET Polyethylene terephthalate
PGP Prism grating prism
PGPR Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxxiii
PITC Partially independent training conditional
PLGA Poly (DL-lactide-co-glycolide)
PLMM Perturbed linear mixing model
PLS/PLSR/PLS-R Partial least squares
PLS-DA Partial least squares - discriminant analysis
PP Polypropylene
PPI Pixel Purity Index
PPR Plant pigment ratio
PRI Photochemical reflectance index
PRISMA Hyperspectral precursor and application mission
PRR Photochemical reflectance ratio
PS Polystyrene
PSRI Plant senescence reflectance index
PT Peak transmission
PVC Polyvinyl chloride
QbD Quality by design
QDA Quadratic discriminant analysis
QLM Quadratic linear model
QNR Quality without no reference
QS Quorum sensing
QUAC Quick atmospheric correction
rAP reduced attribute profiles
RAS reflection absorption spectroscopy
RBF Radial basis function
RDVI Renormalized difference vegetation index
REI Red edge index
REIP Red edge inflection point
RELAB Reflectance experiment laboratory
RENDVI Narrowband red edge normalized difference vegetation index
RF Random forest
RFP Red fluorescent protein
RGB Red Green Blue
RGF Rolling guided filter
RGRI Red green ratio index
RH Relative humidity
RMSE Root mean square error
ROC Receiver operating characteristics
RoF Rotation forest
ROI/RoI Region of interest
RoRF Rotation random forest
rPCA robust principal component analysis
RR Resonance Raman
RRS Resonance Raman scattering
RTM Radiative transfer models
RVM Relevance vector machine
RVSI Red-edge vegetation stress
S/N Signal-to-noise
SAD Spectral angle distance
SAM Spectral angle mapper
SAR Synthetic aperture radar
SAVI Soil-adjusted vegetation index
SCA Snow cover area
SCC Squamous cell carcinoma
xxxiv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

SCF Snow cover fraction

SCLSU Scaled constrained least squares unmixing
SE Structuring element
SE Standard error
SEBASS Spatially-enhanced broadband array spectrograph system
SEL Standard error of laboratory
SEM Scanning electron microscope
SERRS Surface enhanced resonance Raman scattering
SERS Surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy
SFFS Sequential Forward Floating Selection
SFG Sum-frequency generation
SFIM Smoothing filter-based intensity modulation
SGI Sum green index
SI Spruce index
SID Spectral information divergence
SIF Solar-induce chlorophyll fluorescence
SIMCA Soft Independent Modelling of Class Analogy
SIMPLISMA SIMPLe-to-use Interactive Self-modeling Mixture Analysis
SIMS Secondary ion mass spectrometry
SIPI Structure insensitive pigment index
SISAL Split augmented Lagrangian
SLSQ Spectral oriented least squares
SMIRR Shuttle Multispectral Infrared Radiometer
SNR Signal-to-noise ratio
SNV Standard normal variate
SOC Soil organic carbon
SoD Subset of data
SOM Soil organic matter
SoRs Subset of regressors
SPAD Soil and plant analyzer development
SPARC SPectra bARrax Campaign
SPECK Set Partitioned Embedded bloCK Coder
SPIHT Set Partitioning in Hierarchical Trees
SPOT-VGT Satellite pour l’observation de la terre-vegetation
SRVI Simple ratio vegetation index
SSA Single scattering albedo
SSC Soluble solid content
SSGP Sparse spectrum Gaussian process
SU Spectral unmixing
SVH Spectral variation hypothesis
SVM Support vectors machine
SVR Support vectors regression
SWIR Shortwave infrared
TCARI Transformed chlorophyll absorption in reflectance index
TDI Time delay integration
TH Tungsten halogen
TMW Name derived by authors (Temer and Tischer)
TNT 2,4,6 trinitrotoluene
TOA Top of atmosphere
TSB Tryptone Soy Broth
TVB-N Volatile basic nitrogen
TVC Total viable count
UAV Unmanned aerial vehicle
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxxv
UI Ultrasound Imaging
UMGMC Unweighted pair group method using centroids
UPGMA Unweighted pair group method using arithmetic averages
USAF United States Air Force
UV Ultraviolet
VARI Visible atmospherically resistant index
VCA Vertex component analysis
VIS Visible
Vis-NIR Visible - Near infrared
VNIR Visible - Near infrared
VOG Vogelmann red edge index
VQ Vector quantization
WBC White blood cell
WBI Water band index
WCRP World climate research programme
WEEE Waste from electric and electronic equipment
WLS Weighted least squares
WMGMC Weighted pair group method using centroid
XmCT X-ray computed micro tomography
X-ray CT X-ray computed tomography
XRD X-ray diffraction
XRF X-ray fluorescence
 C H A P T E R

1
A critical history of marine
protected areas
John Humphreysa, b, Robert W.E. Clarkb
a
Institute of Marine Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom;
b
Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority, Poole, United Kingdom
Abstract
Although forms of marine protected area (MPA) have existed for the best part of a century, the beginnings of a
modern global movement can be traced to the first World Congress on National Parks in 1962. However new
impetus was provided by the initiation in 1976 of a process which delivered exclusive rights to sovereign states
over adjacent waters up to 200 nm out. The following decades were marked by a growing body of scientific
evidence on the utility of MPAs and accelerating MPA designations. After the Rio ‘Earth Summit’ in 1992 a
global MPA area target of 10% was established. Failure to achieve this by the 2010 deadline was followed by
its replacement with ‘Aichi target 11’ requiring 10% coverage by 2020. Since then a cycle of target ‘gaming’ by
sovereign states has necessitated repeated efforts to tighten MPA technical requirements. A technocratically
driven dialectical style of international policy development has put increasing emphasis on stronger man-
agement and enforcement solutions, without sufficient reflection on the socio-economic factors which lie
behind the gaming problem. Proposals to increase the area target to 30% are questionable until such time as a
more considered role for MPAs is established within a comprehensive global conservation strategy applying
to 100% of the marine environment.

Keywords:
Aichi Target 11; History of MPAs; Marine Protected Areas; MPAs; MPA Policy.

Development of MPA policy and extent

A key event in the modern global impetus for marine protected areas (MPAs) was the third
United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which ran from 1976 to 1982.
Although UNCLOS included clear statements on marine environmental protection, its main
impact was to formalise a growing inclination to extend national jurisdictions from a three
mile band of coastal waters to a 200 nautical mile ‘Exclusive Economic Zone’ (EEZ) within
which maritime nations have exclusive rights over marine resources. Although not immedi-
ately ratified, the effect was to complete a transition from the sea as belonging in principle to
all nations (and therefore in a sense none), to an arrangement whereby much of the continen-
tal shelf came within the purview of individual states. This in turn provided a strong

Marine Protected Areas

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102698-4.00001-0 1 Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 1. A critical history of marine protected areas

foundation and motivation for a shift from relatively laissez faire marine exploitation to one in
which both the rights and responsibilities of maritime states were explicit. UNCLOS also
established general obligations for safeguarding the marine environment in the High Seas
beyond EEZs. Around the same time a World Congress on National Parks (the ‘Bali
Congress’) called for the incorporation of marine sites into the existing worldwide network
of (mainly terrestrial) protected areas (WCPA, 2018, 1982).
By its extension of sovereign rights from the land to adjacent seas, UNCLOS consolidated
the idea that the practice of designating terrestrial protected areas (nature reserves, national
monuments and parks etc) could similarly be applied at least to the continental shelf. The Bali
Congress gave the subject of MPAs high profile international attention (Gubbay, 1995).
This is not to suggest that there were no MPAs prior to these two events. Possibly the
earliest predominantly sub-tidal MPA was the Fort Jefferson National Monument in Florida,
USA, established as early as 1935 and covering over 18,850 ha of sea (Gubbay, 1995; Jones,
2014). In 1962 the first World Congress on National Parks had recommended governments
to ‘examine as a matter of urgency the possibility of creating marine parks or reserves’
and by 1970 there were already 118 MPAs associated with 27 countries (Silva et al., 1986).
By the mid 1970s Bjorklund (1974) was able to report growing interest by governments in
setting aside marine reserves, not least in Australia whose numerous island reserves on the
Great Barrier Reef would become subsumed into a major marine National Park on the basis
of legislation passed in 1971.
Elsewhere an early pre-occupation with birds left a legacy that can still be seen in the
continued importance of measures originating with the ‘Convention on Wetlands of Interna-
tional Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat’ (Ramsar Convention, 1971) and the Eu-
ropean Union Birds Directive, whose precursor on ‘The Conservation of Birds’ was
established in 1979 (EEC, 1979). Both of these examples established protected areas in coastal
and estuarine systems and exemplified a strict conservation motive in spatial marine
protection.
Therefore although there were MPAs before UNCLOS and the Bali Congress, these two
initiatives marked the creation of a new policy environment within which the motivation
shifted from ad hoc MPAs as adjuncts to terrestrial reserves or for the protection of fragile,
fast degrading and often iconic marine sites, to MPAs as a coherent global marine conserva-
tion strategy with the goal of achieving a representative system of MPAs, informed by scien-
tific evidence. By 1985 the figures had reportedly grown to 430 MPAs across 69 countries
(Silva et al., 1986) with a similar number planned and 87 countries involved. It should be
noted however that these figures included terrestrial protected areas with coastal shores.
Since then, while inclusive of contiguous terrestrial areas, the term MPA is regarded as
applying where the total sea area exceeds that of the land or when the sea area protected
is sufficient in size to be classified in its own right as an MPA. However minimum sizes
for MPAs are not specified (Kelleher, 1999). as since 1992 the most significant global MPA
targets have been expressed as percentages.
During the 1990s, with increasing recognition of the need for science-based decisions (Lub-
chenco et al., 1991) and a growing corpus of literature on the utility of MPAs (e.g. Roberts and
Polunin, 1991), the first area target was formalised after the Rio ‘Earth Summit’ (UN, 1992).
This congress established the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) which in turn devel-
oped goals including Target 1.1: At least 10% of each of the world’s ecological regions effectively
 Developing conceptions of marine protected area 3
conserved (by 2010): The main indicator of success being a measure of the coverage of pro-
tected areas.
As part of this growing momentum, the 1992 World Congress on National Parks and the
resulting ‘Caracas Action Plan’, called for a global system of categorising marine regions as a
basis for assessing the adequacy of then established MPAs (WCPA, 2018, 1994). Three years
later a four volume report established the basis for a ‘Global Representative System of Marine
Protected Areas’. (Kelleher et al., 1995). Meanwhile as nation states made a growing contri-
bution to the 10% CBD target, work continued at international level e.g. Dudley (2008) on
MPA categories and Laffoley (2008) on MPA networks. Nevertheless in 2010 the CBD re-
ported that the 10% area target had not been achieved (CBD, 2010a), noting continuing
decline of various marine habitats including multiple collapses of coral reef ecosystems.
That same year the Strategic Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity revisited the
10% target, this time establishing that by 2020 at least 10% of the worlds coastal and marine
areas should be conserved through ‘effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative
and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures’
(CBD, 2010b, Aichi target 11). The 10% quantitative target was subsequently included
amongst the UN Sustainable Development Goals, although with important qualitative ele-
ments, such as reference to effective management omitted, making it easier to achieve
(Fletcher, 2019, this volume).
In 2017 the UN claimed that the spatial extent of MPAs had more than doubled since
2010 and it was estimated that about 13% of the marine environment under national juris-
dictions was protected within an MPA, and 5.3% of the total ocean area (UN, 2017). How-
ever in 2010 the meaning of the Aichi target 11 reference to effective MPA management and
how it may be assessed was not made clear, with the consequence that estimates of global
MPA coverage are contentious and vary according to source. Reported figures in the official
UN backed World Database on Protected Areas (WDPAs) are consistently higher than those
reported in the Atlas of Marine Protection (MPAtlas.org), run by the US based Marine Con-
servation Institute, an NGO which adjusts the official figures to count only what they re-
gard as strongly protected and fully implemented MPAs. Consequently Sala et al. (2018)
reported a figure of 3.6% of global ocean as protected within ‘actively managed’ MPAs. Un-
derlying these conflicting reports are different and developing conceptions of MPA which
are examined in the following section.
Notwithstanding such challenges, by 2017 the United Nations felt able to claim ‘tremen-
dous progress’, suggesting that the growth, when combined with other commitments already
made by UN member states, indicated that the goal of 10% coverage this time was on target
(UN, 2017). In any event it is true that the global extent of MPAs has increased substantially
in recent years to the point where they are now considered to be the ‘primary tool’ (Dureuil
et al., 2018) and ‘cornerstone’ (Giakoumi et al., 2018) of marine conservation.

Developing conceptions of marine protected area

Since their inception prevailing concepts of marine area-based protection have devel-
oped, informed not least by parallel and interacting movements in environmental policy.
Noel and Weigel (2007) have described changing conceptions of MPAs in stages. In the
4 1. A critical history of marine protected areas

period up to and including the 1960s the primary emphasis was anthropocentric with con-
servation for amenity benefits. An example being the 1968 establishment of the Biscayne
National Park (USA), which covers about 70,000 ha of mainly marine character with the
stated purpose to ‘preserve and protect for education, inspiration, recreation and enjoyment
.’ The second period from 1970 to 1980 was characterised still in terms of a primacy of con-
servation, but with more scientifically defined conservation goals relating for example to
emblematic species, critical habitats, ecological processes and biodiversity. Since the
1980s however an arguably more profound influence on the conception of MPAs has
been the increasingly universal goal of ‘sustainable development’ which is considered
further below.
Over the periods outlined above various specific types of conservation-motivated spatially-
delineated marine restrictions emerged before the generic term ‘marine protected area’ was
widely applied. Reportedly the phrase was first used during the First World Conference on
National Parks in 1962 (Noel and Weigel, 2007). By 1986 a global catalogue of MPAs (Silva
et al., 1986) listed ninety-one different types of designation, including a multiplicity of
variations on the notions of parks, reserves, sanctuaries, refuges and monuments. Such deno-
tations largely derive from terrestrial protected area types, established before equivalent ma-
rine sites existed. This complexity of MPA nomenclature is the result of numerous different
national and supranational governmental organisations setting up MPAs on the basis of
many different legislative instruments, combined with variations in the nature of the aims
and restrictions, along with changes over time in the prevailing uses of terminology. Various
efforts have been made to find a general definition which encompasses the many designations,
and to locate all MPAs into defined protection categories.
Notably In 1994 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (WCPA, 2018) estab-
lished a system of six categories of protected area applicable to both terrestrial and marine
environments and based primarily on management objectives: strict protection; ecosystem
protection; natural features conservation; active management for habitats or species; protec-
tion for seascapes; recreation; management for the sustainable use of natural resources (see
Kelleher, 1999). However these categories are not mutually exclusive and despite some
administrative importance for consistency of assignment in the official reporting of progress,
and attempts to clarify their application (e g Dudley, 2008), they seem compromised as a
result of the legacy of types they are seeking to systematise and arguably anachronistic in
light of more recent thinking on ecosystem approaches to conservation.
Equally revealing of the difficulties of international policy and practice for MPAs are gen-
eral definitions and how they vary and develop according to the priorities and circumstances
of the people and organisations proposing them. At base most sources have in common the
following defining attributes (Humphreys and Herbert, 2018).
• A geographical area of marine character or influence with defined boundaries, including
both water column and benthic components
• Which is protected through legal or other explicit means
• For the purpose of conservation of specified features or systems, and
• Managed with the intention of achieving a higher level of protection than that of the
surrounding area
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 parte,
no me espantara á mí
serme enemigo
el cielo, tierra, Amor y la
Fortuna.

Después de haber la pastora

suavemente cantado, soltando la
rienda al amargo y doloroso
llanto, derramó tanta abundancia
de lágrimas y dió tan tristes
gemidos, que por ellos y por las
palabras que dijo, conoscíeron
ser la causa de su dolor un
engaño cruel de su sospechoso
marido. Pero por certificarse
mejor de quién era y de la causa
de su passión, entraron donde
ella estaba y la hallaron metida en
un sombrío que la espessura de
los ramos había compuesto,
assentada sobre la menuda
hierba junto á una alegre
fuentecilla, que de entre unas
matas graciosamente saliendo
por gran parte del bosquecillo, por
diversos caminos iba corriendo.
Saludáronla con mucha cortesía,
y ella aunque tuvo pesar que
impidiessen su llanto, pero
juzgando por la vista ser pastores
de merescimiento, no recibió
mucha pena, esperando con ellos
tener agradable compañía, y ansí
les dijo: Después que de mi cruel
esposo fuí sin razón
desamparada, no me acuerdo,
pastores, haber recebido contento
que de gran parte iguale con el
que tuve de veros. Tanto que,
aunque el continuo dolor me
obliga á hacer perpetuo llanto, lo
dejaré por agora un rato, para
gozar de vuestra apacible y
discreta conversación. A esto
respondió Marcelio: Nunca yo
vea consolado mi tormento, si no
me pesa tanto del tuyo, como se
puede encarescer, y lo mesmo
puedes creer de la hermosa
Diana, que ves en mi compañía.
Oyendo entonces la pastora el
nombre de Diana, corriendo con
grande alegría la abrazó,
haciéndole mil caricias y fiestas,
porque mucho tiempo había que
deseaba conoscella, por la
relación que tenía de su
hermosura y discreción. Diana
estuvo espantada de verse
acariciada de una pastora no
conoscida; mas todavía le
respondía con iguales cortesías, y
deseando saber quién era, le dijo:
Los aventajados favores que me
heciste, juntamente con la lástima
que tengo de tu mal, hacen que
desee conoscerte; por esso
decláranos, pastora, tu nombre, y
cuéntanos tu pena, que después
de contada verás nuestros
corazones ayudarte á pasalla y
nuestros ojos á lamentar por ella.
La pastora entonces se escusó
con sus graciosas palabras de
emprender el cuento de su
desdicha; pero en fin,
importunada se volvió á sentar
sobre la hierba, y comenzó assí:
Por relación de la pastora
Selvagia, que era natural de mi
aldea, y en la tuya, hermosa
Diana, está casada con el pastor
Sylvano, creo que serás
informada del nombre de la
desdichada Ismenia, que su
desventura te está contando. Yo
tengo por cierto que ella en tu
aldea contó largamente cómo yo
en el templo de Minerva, en el
reyno de Lusitanos, arrebozada la
engañé, y cómo con mi proprio
engaño quedé burlada. Habrá
contado también cómo por
vengarme del traydor Alanio, que
enamorado della á mí me había
puesto en olvido, fingí querer bien
á Montano, su mortal enemigo, y
cómo este fingido amor, con el
conoscimiento que tuve de su
perfección, salió tan verdadero,
que á causa dél estoy en las
fatigas de que me quejo. Pues
passando adelante en la historia
de mi vida, sabréis que como el
padre de Montano, nombrado
Fileno, viniesse algunas veces á
casa de mi padre, á causa de
ciertos negocios que tenía con él
sobre una compañía de ganados,
y me viesse allí, aunque era algo
viejo, se enamoró de mí de tal
suerte, que andaba hecho loco.
Mil veces me importunaba, cada
día sus dolores me decía; mas
nada le aprovechó para que le
quisiesse escuchar, ni tener
cuenta con sus palabras. Porque
aunque tuviera más perfección y
menos años de los que tenía, no
olvidara yo por él á su hijo
Montano, cuyo amor me tenía
captiva. No sabía el viejo el amor
que Montano me tenía, porque le
era hijo tan obediente y temeroso,
que escusó todo lo possible que
no tuviesse noticia dello,
temiendo ser por él con ásperas
palabras castigado. Ni tampoco
sabía Montano la locura de su
padre, porque él por mejor
castigar y reprender los errores
del hijo se guardaba mucho de
mostrar que tenía semejantes y
aun mayores faltas. Pero nunca
dejaba el enamorado viejo de
fatigarme con sus
importunaciones que le quisiesse
tomar por marido. Decíame dos
mil requiebros, hacíame grandes
ofrescimientos, prometíame
muchos vestidos y joyas y
enviábame muchas cartas,
pretendiendo con ello vencer mi
propósito y ablandar mi condición.
Era pastor que en su tiempo
había sido señalado en todas las
habilidades pastoriles, muy bien
hablado, avisado y entendido. Y
porque mejor lo creáis, quiero
deciros una carta que una vez me
escribió, la cual, aunque no mudó
mi intención, me contentó en
estremo, y decía ansí:

CARTA DE FILENO Á
ISMENIA
Pastora, el amor fué parte
que por su pena decirte,
tenga culpa en escrebirte
quien no la tiene en amarte.
Mas si á ti fuere molesta
mi carta, ten por muy cierto
que á mí me tiene ya muerto
el temor de la respuesta.

Mil veces cuenta te di

del tormento que me das,
y no me pagas con más
de con burlarte de mí.
Te ríes á boca llena
de verme amando morir,
yo alegre en verte reir,
aunque ríes de mi pena.

Y ansí el mal, en que me hallo,

pienso, quando miro en ello,
que porque huelgas de
vello,
no has querido remediallo.
Pero mal remedio veo,
y esperarle será en vano,
pues mi vida está en tu
mano
y mi muerte en tu deseo.

Vite estar, pastora, un día

cabe el Duero caudaloso,
dando con el gesto hermoso
á todo el campo alegría.
Sobre el cayado inclinada
en la campaña desierta,
con la cerviz descubierta
y hasta el codo remangada.

Pues decir que un corazón,

puesto que de mármol
fuera,
no te amara, si te viera,
es simpleza y sinrazón.
Por esso en ver tu valor,
sin tener descanso un poco,
vine á ser de amores loco
y á ser muerto de dolor.

Si dices que ando perdido,

siendo enamorado y viejo,
deja de darme consejo,
que yo remedio te pido.
Porque tanto en bien quererte
no pretendo haber errado,
como en haberme tardado
tanto tiempo á conoscerte.
Muy bien sé que viejo estó,
pero á más mal me condena
ver que no tenga mi pena
tantos años como yo.
Porque quisiera quererte
dende el día que nascí,
como después que te vi
 he de amarte hasta la
muerte.

No te espante verme cano,

que á nadie es justo quitar
el merescido lugar,
por ser venido temprano.
Y aunque mi valor excedes,
no paresce buen consejo
que por ser soldado viejo
pierda un hombre las
mercedes.

Los edificios humanos,

cuantos más modernos son,
no tienen comparación
con los antiguos Romanos.
Y en las cosas de primor,
gala, asseo y valentía,
suelen decir cada día:
lo passado es lo mejor.

No me dió amor su tristeza

hasta agora, porque vió
que en un viejo, como yo,
suele haber mayor firmeza.
Firme estoy, desconocida,
para siempre te querer,
y viejo para no ser
querido en toda mi vida.

Los mancebos que más

quieren,
falsos y doblados van,
porque más vivos están,
cuando más dicen que
mueren.
Y su mudable afición,
es segura libertad,
es gala, y no voluntad,
es costumbre, y no passión.

No hayas miedo que yo sea

como el mancebo amador,
que en recebir un favor
lo sabe toda la aldea.
Que aunque reciba trescientos
he de ser en los amores
tan piedra en callar favores
como en padescer
tormentos.

Mas según te veo estar

puesta en hacerme morir,
mucho habrá para sufrir
y poco para callar.
Que el mayor favor que aquí,
pastora, pretendo hacer,
es morir por no tener
mayores quejas de ti.

Tiempo, amigo de dolores,

sólo á ti quiero inculparte,
pues quien tiene en ti más
parte
menos vale en los amores.
Tarde amé cosa tan bella,
y es muy justo que pues yo
no nascí, cuando nasció,
en dolor muera por ella.

Si yo en tu tiempo viniera,
pastora, no me faltara
conque á ti te contentara
 y aun favores recibiera.
Que en apacible tañer,
y en el gracioso bailar
los mejores del lugar
tomaban mi parescer.

Pues en cantar no me espanto

de Amphion el escogido,
pues mejores que él han
sido
confundidos con mi canto.
Aro muy grande comarca,
y en montes proprios y
extraños
pascen muy grandes
rebaños
almagrados de mi marca.

¿Mas qué vale, ¡ay, cruda

suerte!
lo que es, ni lo que ha sido
al sepultado en olvido
y entregado á dura muerte?
Pero valga para hacer
más blanda tu condición,
viendo que tu perfección
al fin dejará de ser.

Dura estás como las peñas,

mas quizá en la vieja edad
no tendrás la libertad
conque agora me desdeñas.
Porque, toma tal venganza
de vosotras el Amor,
que entonces os da dolor
cuando os falta la
esperanza.
Estas y otras muchas cartas y
canciones me envió, las cuales, si
tanto me movieran como me
contentaban, él se tuuiera por
dichoso y yo quedara mal casada.
Mas ninguna cosa era bastante á
borrar de mi corazón la imagen
del amado Montano, el cual,
según mostraba, respondió á mi
voluntad con iguales obras y
palabras. En esta alegre vida
passamos algunos años, hasta
que nos paresció dar
cumplimiento á nuestro descanso
con honesto y casto matrimonio.
Y aunque quiso Montano antes de
casar conmigo dar razón dello á
su padre, por lo que como buen
hijo tenía obligación de hacer;
pero como yo le dije que su padre
no venía bien en ello, á causa de
la locura que tenía de casarse
conmigo, por esso, teniendo más
cuenta con el contento de su vida
que con la obediencia de su
padre, sin dalle razón, cerró mi
desdichado matrimonio. Esto se
hizo con voluntad de mi padre, en
cuya casa se hicieron por ello
grandes fiestas, bailes, juegos y
tan grandes regocijos, que fueron
nombrados por todas las aldeas
vecinas y apartadas. Cuando el
enamorado viejo supo que su
propio hijo le había salteado sus
amores, se volvió tan frenético
contra él y contra mí, que á
entrambos aborresció como la
misma muerte, y nunca más nos
quiso ver. Por otra parte, una
pastora de aquella aldea,
nombrada Felisarda, que moría
de amores de Montano, la cual él,
por quererme bien á mí, y por ser
ella no muy joven ni bien
acondicionada, la había
desechado, cuando vido á
Montano casado conmigo, vino á
perderse de dolor. De manera que
con nuestro casamiento nos
ganamos dos mortales enemigos.
El maldito viejo, por tener ocasión
de desheredar el hijo, determinó
casarse con mujer hermosa y
joven á fin de haber hijos en ella.
Mas aunque era muy rico, de
todas las pastoras de mi lugar fué
desdeñado, si no fué de
Felisarda, que por tener
oportunidad y manera de gozar
deshonestamente de mi Montano,
cuyos amores tenía frescos en la
memoria, se casó con el viejo
Fileno. Casada ya con él,
entendió luego por muchas
formas en requerir mi esposo
Montano por medio de una criada
nombrada Silveria, enviándole á
decir que si condescendía á su
voluntad le alcanzaría perdón de
su padre, y haciéndole otros
muchos y muy grandes
ofrescimientos. Mas nada pudo
bastar á corromper su ánimo ni á
pervertir su intención. Pues como
Felisarda se viese tan
menospreciada, vino á tenerle á
Montano una ira mortal, y trabajó
luego en indignar más á su padre
contra él, y no contenta con esto,
imaginó una traición muy grande.
Con promessas, fiestas, dádivas y
grandes caricias, pervirtió de tal
manera el ánimo de Silveria, que
fué contenta de hacer cuanto ella
le mandasse, aunque fuesse
contra Montano, con quien ella
tenía mucha cuenta, por el tiempo
que había servido en casa de su
padre. Las dos secretamente
concertaron lo que se había de
hacer y el punto que había de
ejecutarse; y luego salió un día
Silveria de la aldea, y viniendo á
una floresta orilla de Duero,
donde Montano apascentaba sus
ovejas, le habló muy
secretamente, y muy turbada,
como quien trata un caso muy
importante, le dijo: ¡Ay, Montano
amigo! cuán sabio fuiste en
despreciar los amores de tu
maligna madrastra, que aunque
yo á ellos te movía, era por pura
importunación. Mas agora que sé
lo que passa, no será ella
bastante para hacerme mensajera
de sus deshonestidades. Yo he
sabido della algunas cosas que
tocan en lo vivo, y tales que si tú
las supiesses, aunque tu padre es
contigo tan cruel, no dejarías de
poner la vida por su honra. No te
digo más en esto, porque sé que
eres tan discreto y avisado, que
no son menester contigo muchas
palabras ni razones. Montano á
esto quedó atónito y tuvo
sospecha de alguna
deshonestidad de su madrastra.
Pero por ser claramente
informado, rogó á Silveria le
contasse abiertamente lo que
sabía. Ella se hizo de rogar,
mostrando no querer descubrir
cosa tan secreta, pero al fin,
declarando lo que Montano le
preguntaba, y lo que ella mesma
decirle quería, le explicó una
fabricada y bien compuesta
mentira, diciendo deste modo: Por
ser cosa que tanto importa á tu
honra y á la de Fileno, mi amo,
saber lo que yo sé, te lo diré muy
claramente, confiando que á
nadie dirás que yo he descubierto
este secreto. Has de saber que
Felisarda tu madrastra hace
traición á tu padre con un pastor,
cuyo nombre no te diré, pues está
en tu mano conoscerle. Porque si
quisieres venir esta noche, y
entrar por donde yo te guiare,
hallarás la traidora con el adúltero
en casa del mesmo Fileno. Ansí
lo tienen concertado, porque
Fileno ha de ir esta tarde á dormir
en su majada por negocios que
allí se le ofrescen, y no ha de
volver hasta mañana á medio día.
Por esso apercíbete muy bien, y
ven á las once de la noche
conmigo, que yo te entraré en
parte donde podrás fácilmente
hacer lo que conviene á la honra
de tu padre, y aun por medio
desto alcanzar que te perdone.
Esto dijo Silveria tan
encarescidamente y con tanta
dissimulación, que Montano
determinó de ponerse en
cualquier peligro, por tomar
venganza de quien tal deshonra
hacía á Fileno, su padre. Y ansí la
traidora Silveria contenta del
engaño que de consejo de
Felisarda había urdido, se volvió á
su casa, donde dió razón á
Felisarda, su señora, de lo que
dejaba concertado. Ya la escura
noche había extendido su
tenebroso velo, cuando venido
Montano á la aldea tomó un
puñal, que heredó del pastor
Palemón, su tío, y al punto de las
once se fué á casa de Fileno, su
padre, donde Silveria ya le
estaba esperando, como estaba
ordenado. ¡Oh, traición nunca
vista! ¡Oh, maldad nunca
pensada! Tomóle ella por la
mano, y subiendo muy queda una
escalera, le llevó á una puerta de
una cámara, donde Fileno, su
padre, y su madrastra Felisarda
estaban acostados, y cuando le
tuvo allí, le dijo: Agora estás,
Montano, en el lugar donde has
de señalar el ánimo y esfuerzo
que semejante caso requiere;
entra en essa cámara, que en ella
hallarás tu madrastra acostada
con el adúltero. Dicho esto, se fue
de allí huyendo á más andar.
Montano engañado de la alevosia
de Silveria, dando crédito á sus
palabras, esforzando el ánimo y
sacando el puñal de la vaina, con
un empujón abriendo la puerta de
la cámara, mostrando una furia
extraña, entró en ella diciendo á
grandes voces: ¡Aquí has de
morir, traidor, á mis manos, aquí
te han de hacer mal provecho los
amores de Felisarda! Y diciendo
esto furioso y turbado, sin
conoscer quién era el hombre que
estaba en la cama, pensando
herir al adúltero, alzó el brazo
para dar de puñaladas á su
padre. Mas quiso la ventura que
el viejo con la lumbre que allí
tenía, conosciendo su hijo, y
pensando que por habelle con
palabra y obras tan mal tratado, le
quería matar, alzándose presto de
la cama, con las manos plegadas
le dijo: ¡Oh, hijo mío! ¿qué
crueldad te mueve á ser verdugo
de tu padre? vuelve en tu seso,
por Dios, y no derrames agora mi
sangre, ni des fin á mi vida; que si
yo contigo usé de algunas
asperezas, aquí de rodillas te pido
perdón por todas ellas, con
propósito de ser para contigo de
hoy adelante el más blando y
benigno padre de todo el mundo.
Montano entonces, cuando
conosció el engaño que se le
había hecho y el peligro en que
había venido de dar muerte á su
mesmo padre, se quedó allí tan
pasmado, que el ánimo y los
brazos se le cayeron y el puñal se
le salió de las manos sin sentirlo.
De atónito no pudo ni supo hablar
palabra, sino que corrido y
confuso se salió de la cámara;
íbase también de la casa aterrado
de la traición que Silveria le había
hecho y de la que él hiciera, si no
fuera tan venturoso. Felisarda,
como estaba advertida de lo que
había de suceder, en ver entrar á
Montano, saltó de la cama y se
metió en otra cámara que estaba
más adentro, y cerrando tras sí la
puerta, se asseguró de la furia de
su alnado. Mas cuando se vió
fuera del peligro, por estar
Montano fuera de la casa,
volviendo donde Fileno temblando
aún del pasado peligro estaba,
incitando el padre contra el hijo, y
levantándome á mí falso
testimonio, á grandes voces decía
ansí: Bien conoscerás agora,
Fileno, el hijo que tienes, y sabrás
si es verdad lo que yo de sus
malas inclinaciones muchas
veces te dije. ¡Oh, cruel, oh
traidor Montano! ¿cómo el cielo
no te confunde? ¿cómo la tierra
no te traga? ¿cómo las fieras no
te despedazan? ¿cómo los
hombres no te persiguen? Maldito
sea tu casamiento, maldita tu
desobediencia, malditos tus
amores, maldita tu Ismenia, pues
te ha traido á usar de tan bestial
crueza y á cometer tan horrendo
pecado. ¿No castigaste, traidor, al
pastor Alanio, que con tu mujer
Ismenia á pesar y deshonra tuya
deshonestamente trata, y á quien
ella quiere más que á ti, y has
querido dar muerte á tu padre,
que con tu vida y honra ha tenido
tanta cuenta? ¿Por haberte
aconsejado le has querido matar?
¡Ay, triste padre! ¡ay, desdichadas
canas! ¡ay, angustiada senectud!
¿qué yerro tan grande cometiste,
para que quisiesse matarte tu
proprio hijo? ¿aquel que tú
engendraste, aquel que tú
regalaste, aquel por quien mil
trabajos padesciste? Esfuerza
agora tu corazón, cesse agora el
amor paternal, dése lugar á la
justicia, hágase el debido castigo;
que si quien hizo tan nefanda
crueldad no recibe la merescida
pena, los desobedientes hijos no
quedarán atemorizados, y el tuyo,
con efecto, vendrá después de
pocos días á darte de su mano
cumplida muerte. El congojado
Fileno, con el pecho
sobresaltado y temeroso, oyendo
las voces de su mujer y
considerando la traición del hijo,
rescibió tan grande enojo, que,
tomando el puñal que á Montano,
como dije, se le había caído,
luego en la mañana saliendo á la
plaza, convocó la justicia y los
principales hombres de la aldea, y
cuando fueron todos juntos, con
muchas lágrimas y sollozos les
dijo desta manera: A Dios pongo
por testigo, señalados pastores,
que me lastima y aflige tanto lo
que quiero deciros, que tengo
miedo que el alma no se me salga
tras habello dicho. No me tenga
nadie por cruel, porque saco á la
plaza las maldades de mi hijo;
que por ser ellas tan extrañas y
no tener remedio para castigarlas,
os quiero dar razón dellas, porque
veáis lo que conviene hacer para
darle á él la justa pena y á los
otros hijos provechoso ejemplo.
Muy bien sabéis con qué regalos
le crié, con qué amor le traté, qué
habilidades le enseñé, qué
trabajos por él padescí, qué
consejos le di, con cuánta
blandura le castigué. Casóse á mi
pesar con la pastora Ismenia, y
porque dello le reprendí, en lugar
de vengarse del pastor Alanio,
que con la dicha Ismenia, su
mujer, como toda la aldea sabe,
trata deshonestamente, volvió su
furia contra mí y me ha querido
dar la muerte. La noche passada
tuvo maneras para entrar en la
cámara, donde yo con mi
Felisarda dormía, y con este
puñal desnudo quiso matarme, y
lo hiciera, sino que Dios le cortó
las fuerzas y le atajó el poder de
tal manera, que medio tonto y
pasmado se fué de allí sin
efectuar su dañado intento,
dejando el puñal en mi cámara.
Esto es lo que verdaderamente
passa, como mejor de mi querida
mujer podréis ser informados.
Mas porque tengo por muy cierto
que Montano, mi hijo, no hubiera
cometido tal traición contra su
padre, si de su mujer Ismenia no
fuera aconsejado, os ruego que
miréis lo que en esto so debe
hacer, para que mi hijo de su
atrevimiento quede castigado, y la
falsa Ismenia, ansí por el consejo
que dió á su marido, como por la
deshonestidad y amores que
tiene con Alanio, resciba digna
pena. Aún no había Fileno
acabado su razón, cuando se
movió entre la gente tan gran
alboroto, que paresció hundirse
toda la aldea. Alteráronse los
ánimos de todos los pastores y
pastoras, y concibieron ira mortal
contra Montano. Unos decían que
fuesse apedreado, otros que en la
mayor profundidad de Duero
fuesse echado, otros que á las
hambrientas fieras fuesse
entregado, y en fin, no hubo allí
persona que contra él no se
embravesciesse. Moviólos
también mucho á todos lo que
Fileno de mi vida falsamente les
había dicho; pero tanta ira tenían
por el negocio de Montano, que
no pensaron mucho en el mío.
Cuando Montano supo la relación
que su padre públicamente había
hecho y el alboroto y conjuración
que contra él había movido, cayó
en grande desesperación. Y
allende desto sabiendo lo que su
padre delante de todos contra mí
había dicho, rescibió tanto dolor,
que más grave no se puede
imaginar. De aquí nasció todo mi
mal, esta fué la causa de mi
perdición y aquí tuvieron principio
mis dolores. Porque mi querido
Montano, como sabía que yo en
otro tienpo había amado y sido
querida de Alanio, sabiendo que
muchas veces reviven y se
renuevan los muertos y olvidados
amores, y viendo que Alanio, á
quien yo por él había aborrescido,
andaba siempre enamorado de
mí, haciéndome importunas
fiestas, sospechó por todo esto