1. Marine Life Protection Act Initiative
Habitat, Size, and Spacing Evaluations of
BRTF Recommended MPA Proposals for the
MLPA North Coast Study Region
Presentation to the California Fish and Game Commission and the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force
February 2, 2011 • Sacramento, CA
Dr. Eric Bjorkstedt, Co-chair • MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory Team

2. Notes on Evaluations
Results presented for marine protected areas (MPAs) at very high and moderate-high levels of protection (LOPs)
No high protection MPAs were included in the Revised Round 3 MLPA North Coast Regional Stakeholder Group (NCRSG) MPA Proposal (RNCP) or the North Coast Enhanced Compliance Alternative MPA Proposal (ECA); thus evaluations at high protection are omitted from all evaluation materials.

3. Notes on Evaluations Nearshore "ribbon" MPAs proposed in ECA
Confine uses with assigned LOPs below moderate-high to a narrow ribbon along the shoreline (extending from the shore to about 1000 feet offshore)
"Ribbon" MPAs split the 0-30m (meter) depth zone into multiple MPAs with different LOPs. For evaluation purposes, 0-30m habitats are evaluated at the lowest LOP within the 0-30m zone.

4. Habitat Distribution in the NCSR
Beaches and Rocky Shores
Replicates of beach habitat are available throughout the North Coast Study Region (NCSR).
Replicates of rocky shore habitat are available along most sections of coast, with the exception of the area near Humboldt Bay.
Differences in shoreline protection between RNCP and ECA at Reading Rock.
Notes on habitat distribution:
Only one section of coast (near Humboldt Bay) where rocky shore habitat is not available in sufficient amounts to constitute a replicate within an MPA within the minimum size range

5. Habitat Distribution in the NCSR
Nearshore (0-30m) Habitats
Replicates of kelp and rock 0-30m habitat are rare north of Shelter Cove.
Replicates of soft 0-30m habitat are available throughout the NCSR.
Differences in nearshore protection between RNCP and ECA at Reading Rock.
This graphic shows the replicates available in an MPA that's within the minimum size range. Larger MPAs have a greater likelihood of including replicates.
Both 0-30m rock and kelp ARE available at the areas indicated, but may require larger than minimum size MPAs to replicate them
0-30m soft habitat is replicated in most MPAs.

6. Habitat Distribution in the NCSR
Deeper Rock ( m) Habitats
Replicates of rock m habitat are available along most sections of coast, with the exception of areas near the Klamath River and Humboldt Bay.
Replicates of rock m are available only near Cape Mendocino.
Differences in deeper habitat protection between RNCP and ECA at multiple MPAs.
Notice that the MPAs shown to the right of the graph change as we move to consider deeper habitats. This shows the LOP and distribution of MPAs in that depth zone.
30-100m rock habitat is replicated in most MPAs that include that depth zone

7. Habitat Distribution in the NCSR
Deeper Soft bottom ( m) Habitats
Replicates of soft m habitat are available along most sections of the coast and included in most MPAs.
Replicates of soft m habitat are rare north of Cape Mendocino and available only near Point St. George.
Differences in deeper habitat protection between RNCP and ECA at multiple MPAs.

8. Representation: Rocky Habitats
At very high protection the RNCP and ECA are identical.
4-8% of available shoreline and nearshore rocky habitats included
20-36% of deeper rock habitats included

9. Representation: Rocky Habitats
Can toggle back to very high to show change
At or above moderate-high protection:
ECA includes a slightly larger percentage of most rocky habitats than RNCP.
Both proposals include less than 10% of shoreline and nearshore rocky habitats and more than 20% of deeper rocky habitats.

10. Representation: Soft Bottom Habitats
Note: low overall percentages, many below 5%.
At very high protection the RNCP and ECA are identical.
1.5-7% of available soft-bottom habitats included
~20% of rare canyon habitat included

11. Representation: Soft Bottom Habitats
Note: low overall percentages, many near 10%.
At or above moderate-high protection:
ECA includes a larger percentage of all soft bottom habitats.
Both proposals include less than 5% of shoreline and nearshore soft-bottom habitats.

12. Representation: Estuarine Habitats
For tidal flats "poorly mapped" means that some MPAs may include tidal flats although it is not mapped.
Identical evaluation results and moderate-high protection because neither proposal includes any estuarine MPAs at high or moderate-high protection.
At very high protection:
RNCP includes 0-1.4% of estuary, marsh, mapped eelgrass, and tidal flats and 1 of 8 (12.5%) known eelgrass locations.
ECA includes 0-3.3% of estuary, marsh, mapped eelgrass and tidal flats and 2 of 8 (25%) known eelgrass locations.
Identical evaluation results at or above moderate-high protection.

13. Bioregional Replication
Beaches, kelp and 0-30m rock aren't replicated in the northern bioregion meaning that the state-wide network for these habitats does not include the northern half of the NCSR (effectively stops at Ten Mile SMR)
Bolded boxes indicate replicates that fall on the bioregional divide and can reasonably be assigned to either bioregion.
m rock is replicated only near punta gorda (the only place it's available)
At very high protection the RNCP and ECA are identical.
Three habitats—beaches, kelp, and 0-30m rock—are not replicated in northern bioregion.
Rare m rock and soft bottom habitats are replicated in only one MPA that falls on bioregional divide.

14. Bioregional Replication
Kelp and 0-30m rock aren't replicated in the northern bioregion meaning that the state-wide network for these habitats does not include the northern half of the NCSR (effectively stops at Ten Mile SMR)
Bolded boxes indicate replicates that fall on the bioregional divide and can reasonably be assigned to either bioregion.
m rock is replicated only near punta gorda (the only place it's available)
At or above moderate-high protection:
Two habitats, kelp and 0-30m rock, are not replicated in northern bioregion in either proposal.
As compared to RNCP, ECA includes more replicates of beaches, rocky shores, soft 0-30m, soft m, and soft m.

15. Bioregional Replication
* Eelgrass is only mapped in Humboldt Bay and thus mapped eelgrass can only be replicated in the northern bioregion.
Identical evaluation results and moderate-high protection because neither proposal includes any estuarine MPAs at high or moderate-high protection.
At very high protection:
RNCP includes replicates of each available estuarine habitat in the southern bioregion, but no estuarine replicates in the northern bioregion.
ECA includes one replicate of each available estuarine habitat in both northern and southern bioregions.
Identical evaluation results at moderate-high protection.

16. Summary of Habitat Evaluations
Guidelines Achieved
At very high protection:
Both proposals represent all key habitats, except tidal flats, to some extent (1-36% of available)
Both proposals meet replication guidelines for all key habitats at biogeographic scale (3-5 replicates), and at least one replicate of each is included in NCSR
RNCP replicates 6 of 12 key habitats in both northern and southern bioregions
ECA replicates 9 of 12 key habitats in both northern and southern bioregions (adds estuarine habitats relative to RNCP)
Tidal flats are poorly mapped, thus some MPAs may include tidal flats although it is not mapped. 16

17. Guidelines Achieved (continued)
Summary of Habitat Evaluations
Guidelines Achieved (continued)
At or above moderate-high protection:
Tidal flats (poorly mapped) not represented in either proposal, but all other habitats represented to some extent
RNCP replicates 6 of 12 key habitats in both northern and southern bioregions
ECA replicates 10 of 12 key habitats in both northern and southern bioregions (adds estuarine habitats and rocky shores relative to RNCP)
For tidal flats "poorly mapped" means that some MPAs may include tidal flats although it is not mapped. 17

18. Guidelines Not Achieved
Summary of Habitat Evaluations
Guidelines Not Achieved
At very high protection:
Neither proposal represents tidal flats (poorly mapped) within NCSR
RNCP does not replicate 6 of 12 key habitats in the northern bioregion of NCSR: beaches, kelp, rock 0-30m, estuary, marsh and eelgrass
ECA does not replicate 3 of 12 key habitats in the northern bioregion of NCSR: beaches, kelp and rock 0-30m
For tidal flats "poorly mapped" means that some MPAs may include tidal flats although it is not mapped. 18

19. Guidelines Not Achieved (continued)
Summary of Habitat Evaluations
Guidelines Not Achieved (continued)
At or above moderate-high protection:
Neither proposal represents tidal flats (poorly mapped) within NCSR
RNCP does not replicate 6 of 12 key habitats in the northern bioregion of NCSR: beaches, kelp, rock 0-30m, estuary, marsh, and eelgrass
ECA does not replicate 2 of 12 key habitats in the northern bioregion of NCSR: kelp and rock 0-30m
For tidal flats "poorly mapped" means that some MPAs may include tidal flats although it is not mapped. 19

20. Cluster Sizes: Very High Protection
NOTE: MPAs are not only "in the minimum range" but clustered near the minimum end of this range!
Dotted line in the preferred range indicates 36 sq mi.
Note, new tables in evaluation document list MPA sizes for each proposal.
At very high protection the RNCP and ECA are identical: most MPAs are within the minimum size range and no MPAs are within the preferred size range.

21. Cluster Sizes: Moderate-high Protection
Still a large proportion of MPA clusters close to the minimum size in both proposals, but a wider range of sizes in ECA.
At or above moderate-high protection, as compared to very high protection:
RNCP includes one more minimum size MPA cluster.
ECA includes four more minimum size MPA clusters and one preferred size MPA cluster.

22. Max Gaps: Very High Protection
Kelp and 0-30m rock: the only replicate of these habitats included at or above mod-high protection occurs in Ten Mile SMR 174 miles from the Oregon border. The state-wide network for kelp and 0-30m rock effectively ENDS at Ten Mile!
Beaches: the only replicate of this habitat included at or above moderate-high protection occurs in the Ten Mile SMR, 174 miles from the Oregon border and 95 miles from Bodega Head SMR (the nearest replicate to the south)
Soft 0-30m: Gap really exists in study region - South Cape Mendocino to Oregon Border
Not possible to meet spacing guidelines for kelp, rock m, or soft m habitats
At very high protection, RNCP and ECA are identical: both approach spacing guidelines for rock m and soft m

23. Max Gaps: Moderate-High Protection
For kelp and 0-30m rock the state-wide network effectively ENDS at Ten Mile!
In ECA, the largest gap for soft 0-30m habitat occurs between the Ten Mile cluster and the nearest MPA in the NCCSR that replicates this habitat, Bodega Head SMR.
RNCP achieves or approaches the spacing guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 3 habitats.
ECA achieves or approaches the spacing guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 5 habitats.
Spacing gaps remain in both proposals for beaches, kelp, rock 0-30m and soft 0-30m.

24. Estuarine Spacing: Very High Protection
No estuarine MPAs at high or moderate-high protection, thus evaluations at moderate high are identical to those at very high for both proposals.
It is not possible to meet spacing guidelines for marsh or eelgrass habitats due to uneven distribution of habitats.
In RNCP, estuarine habitats are replicated only at Ten Mile estuary, thus largest gaps extend from Ten Mile estuary north to Oregon.
In ECA, gaps for estuarine habitats are reduced by the South Humboldt Bay State Marine Recreational Management Area.

25. Size and Spacing Summary
Guidelines Achieved
At very high protection:
Both proposals have all but one MPA within minimum size range
RNCP approaches guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 2 habitats: rock m and soft m
ECA approaches guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 3 habitats: rock m, soft m, and marsh 25

26. Guidelines Achieved (continued)
Size and Spacing Summary
Guidelines Achieved (continued)
At or above moderate-high protection:
RNCP includes 6 MPAs in the minimum size range and 1 below minimum size MPA
ECA includes 9 MPAs in the minimum size range, 1 preferred size MPA and 1 below minimum size MPA
RNCP achieves spacing guidelines for 1 habitat: rock m
ECA achieves spacing guidelines for 2 habitats: rocky shores and rock m
RNCP achieves or approaches guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 3 habitats: rock m, rock m and soft m
ECA achieves or approaches guidelines or minimum possible spacing for 6 habitats: rocky shores, rock m, rock m, soft m, soft m, and marsh 26

27. Guidelines Not Achieved
Size and Spacing Summary
Guidelines Not Achieved
At very high protection:
No MPAs within preferred size range exist in either proposal
In RNCP, spacing gaps for 10 of 12 key habitats substantially exceed guidelines or minimum possible spacing: beaches, rocky shores, kelp, rock 0-30m, rock m, soft 0-30m, soft m, estuary marsh and eelgrass
In ECA, spacing gaps for 9 of 12 key habitats substantially exceed guidelines or minimum possible spacing: beaches, rocky shores, kelp, rock 0-30m, rock m, soft 0-30m, soft m, estuary and eelgrass
A general trend toward minimum size and maximum spacing may impair the functioning of the network. The network should be greater than the sum of its parts, but as you trend toward minimum size and maximum spacing you risk that it MAY NOT be greater than the sum of its parts.
Guidelines are not thresholds, benefits accrue non-linearly, but gradually. By minimally achieving the guidelines, you do not ensure a maximally functional network. 27

28. Guidelines Not Achieved (continued)
Size and Spacing Summary
Guidelines Not Achieved (continued)
At or above mod-high protection:
RNCP includes no MPAs within preferred size range
In RNCP, spacing gaps for 9 of 12 key habitats substantially exceed guidelines or minimum possible spacing: beaches, rocky shores, kelp, rock 0-30m, soft 0-30m, soft m, estuary, marsh and eelgrass
In ECA, spacing gaps for 6 of 12 key habitats substantially exceed guidelines or minimum possible spacing: beaches, kelp, rock 0-30m, soft 0-30m, estuary and eelgrass
A general trend toward minimum size and maximum spacing may impair the functioning of the network. The network should be greater than the sum of its parts, but as you trend toward minimum size and maximum spacing you risk that it MAY NOT be greater than the sum of its parts.
Guidelines are not thresholds, benefits accrue non-linearly, but gradually. By minimally achieving the guidelines, you do not ensure a maximally functional network. 28

29. Background Information
The following slides include background information that will not be presented.

30. MLPA Goals*: Habitats
1. To protect the natural diversity and function of marine ecosystems.
2. To help sustain and restore marine life populations.
3. To improve recreational, educational, and study opportunities in areas with minimal human disturbance.
4. To protect representative and unique marine life habitats.
5. Clear objectives, effective management, adequate enforcement, sound science.
6. To ensure that MPAs are designed and managed as a network.
* Note that this language represents a summary of the MLPA goals 30

31. Protecting Habitats (Goals 1 & 4)
Habitat Guidelines
Every 'key' marine habitat should be represented in the MPA network.
12 key habitats in the NCSR
‘Key’ marine habitats should be replicated in multiple MPAs across large environmental and geographic gradients.
3-5 replicates of each habitat per biogeographic region (Pt. Conception to Oregon border)
SAT recommends at least 1 replicate of each habitat per bioregion (northern and southern bioregions in NCSR).
The key words in the first one are too frequently. Some spillover is inevitable.
The key word in the second is sufficient. It is not enough for just a few to make the leap. Enough have to settle either in the mpa they came from or another to guarantee persistence in the face of low numbers outside. 31

32. MPA Areas by Level of Protection
The shaded areas show all the MPAs that are included in the supplemental evaluation because of uses intended to accommodate tribal activities, but currently proposed as open to all recreational users:
Most of these MPAs received a low LOP
Two MPAs received a mod-low LOP (Samoa SMCA and South Humboldt Bay SMRMA)

33. Habitat Availability
Nearshore rocky habitats and kelp are less abundant in northern bioregion.
>100 meter depth habitats are relatively rare across the region, occurring mostly in canyons and southern bioregion.
Soft-bottom habitats are especially abundant in northern bioregion.
Everyone has seen these slides multiple times. Acknowledge that and move on quickly!

34. Habitat Availability
Northern bioregion contains majority of estuarine habitats: 98% of estuarine area 96% of marsh area 99% of tidal flats.
Humboldt Bay contains 62% of all estuarine area and 100% of mapped eelgrass in MLPA North Coast Study Region (NCSR).
Eelgrass is known to exist in 8 estuaries, 4 in the northern and 4 in the southern bioregions.
Everyone has seen these slides multiple times. Acknowledge that and move on quickly!

35. Protecting Nearshore Habitats
dividing line between nearshore and offshore MPAs
To represent or replicate nearshore habitats, the entire 0-30m zone must be included in an MPA or cluster.
Activities in the nearshore "ribbon" MPA may impact species across the 0-30m zone.
Replication and representation of 0-30m habitats is assessed at the lowest LOP in the 0-30m zone (i.e. Low in this example) .
30m contour
Offshore SMCA
LOP = Mod-high
Nearshore SMCA
LOP = Low

36. Replication Guidelines
Replication guidelines in the California Marine Life Protection Act Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas call for 3-5 replicates within the MLPA biogeographic region.

37. Replication Guidelines
Replication guidelines in the Master Plan call for 3-5 replicates within the MLPA biogeographic region
The SAT additionally recommends at least 1 replicate of each habitat per bioregion.
Two bioregions in the north coast study region

38. Replication Guidelines
Replication guidelines in the Master Plan call for 3-5 replicates within the biogeographic region
The SAT additionally recommends at least 1 replicate of each habitat per bioregion
Two bioregions in the north coast study region
No strong biological break at Point Arena, thus the southern bioregion of the NCSR extends into the northern half of the MLPA North Central Coast Study Region

39. MLPA Goals*: Populations
To protect the natural diversity and function of marine ecosystems.
To help sustain and restore marine life populations.
To improve recreational, educational, and study opportunities in areas with minimal human disturbance.
To protect representative and unique marine life habitats.
Clear objectives, effective management, adequate enforcement, sound science.
To ensure that MPAs are designed and managed as a network.
* Note that this language represents a summary of the MLPA goals 39

40. Protecting Populations (Goals 2 & 6)
Size and Spacing Guidelines
MPAs should be large enough that adults do not move out of them too frequently and become vulnerable to fishing.
Minimum range of 9-18 square miles
Preferred range of square miles
MPAs should be close enough together that sufficient larvae can move from one to the next.
MPAs should be placed within miles of each other
Spacing is evaluated for each habitat
The key words in the first one are too frequently. Some spillover is inevitable.
The key word in the second is sufficient. It is not enough for just a few to make the leap. Enough have to settle either in the mpa they came from or another to guarantee persistence in the face of low numbers outside. 40

41. Spacing to Existing MPAs in NCCSR
Spacing to the north is calculated to the nearest potential habitat replicate in Oregon.
Spacing to the south is calculated to the nearest protected habitat replicate in north central coast MPAs.
Recent changes to the Stewarts Point SMR and correction of previous errors increased gaps for beaches and soft 0-30m habitat.
Nearest beach and soft 0-30m habitat replicates are at Bodega Head SMR, approximately 58 miles south of north coast study region boundary.

42. Spacing: Unevenly Distributed Habitats
For some unevenly distributed habitats, spacing guidelines are impossible to meet.
Minimum possible spacing for these habitats:
Kelp: 115 miles (mi)
Deep soft bottom ( m): 95 mi
Deep rock ( m): 110 mi only available in one area in the NCSR