Keywords

1 Introduction

Chile’s Patagonian fjord and channel system (PFCS) is one of the most extensive estuarine ecosystems in the world [42, 43]. It is located on the western edge of Patagonia and covers the Los Lagos, Aysén and Magallanes administrative regions. For the purposes of this chapter, its geographic scope is defined as extending from the Reloncaví Sound to Cape Horn (41° 42′ S 73° 02′W; 55° 58′ S 67° 17′W). Its continental coastline extends approximately 1,600 km from north to south, however, if the >40,000 islands in this zone are included, it extends 100,627 km [22, 58]. This system can be divided into three eco-geographic regions: (i) Chiloé-Taitao, between the Chacao Channel and the Taitao Peninsula (42°–47°S); (ii) Kawésqar (47°–54°S); (iii) Magallanes (54°–56°S) [47]. PFCS habitats are highly heterogeneous in time and space, which is driven by the geomorphological configuration and the local and external oceanographic and meteorological forcings that regulate them [43, 54, 55]. These characteristics promote dynamic processes of retention and transport of nutrients, particles, eggs and larvae, which sustain high levels of diversity and biological production and extend the latitudinal and bathymetric ranges of distribution of some species [34].

The human relationship with the Patagonian coastline has evolved from a subsistence economy until the mid-nineteenth century to a commercial and export-oriented economy, in which fisheries experienced a rapid expansion from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s [28]. The PFCS presently concentrates important artisanal fisheries, whose landings in 2019 reached 192,891 t of benthic species, 9600 t of demersal species and 14,400 t of pelagic species, the last composed almost exclusively of austral sardine (www.sernapesca.cl).

Approximately 40,000 artisanal fishermen operate in the PFCS, including shore harvesters, divers and ship owners, with a fleet of approximately 4000 registered vessels (www.sernapesca.cl). The largest fraction of this fleet belongs to the Los Lagos Region, which has been operating regularly in practically the entire area north of the Taitao Peninsula. This occurs in the context of the Benthic Fisheries Management Plan of the Contiguous Zone of the Los Lagos and Aysén Regions (Fig. 1), whose development was grounded in the historical territorial, economic and cultural continuity existing between the regions [28, 33]. Progressive changes in productivity, exploitation areas and target species have had little effect on the structure of coastal population centers, which have a latitudinal decrease in the number and size of urban centers (Fig. 1a). As a result, the remote coastal areas of the Aysén and Magallanes regions remain almost unpopulated, although subject to the presence of a floating population of fishermen and salmon industry workers whose number exceeds 3000 people in Aysén alone.

Fig. 1
3 maps of Patagonia for population centers and benthic resource extraction. A focuses on the southwestern section. B has registered fishing sites in the Corcovado Gulf and Magallanes region. C marks the AMERB sites in the Los Lagos Region.

Population centers, recorded sources of benthic resource extraction and Management and Exploitation Areas for Benthic Resources (in Spanish AMERBs) in the Patagonian fjord and channel system [2]

Full size image

Research, monitoring, management and control of PFCS fisheries is difficult due to the operational difficulties and the high operational costs in this vast and disconnected territory. The scientific information available on most of its ecosystems, biological communities, and populations is extremely limited. Centralized fishery controls and management measures tend to be violated, with probably significant, although not quantified, levels of underreported and illegal fishing. As a result, there are no available assessments of the ecosystem, community or population consequences of the removal of significant volumes of macroalgae, forage species, scavengers, herbivores and top predators that have occurred in this system since the mid-nineteenth century.

2 Scope and Objectives

This chapter is organized in four sections. In the first, we provide an overview of the recent development of benthic, demersal, and pelagic fisheries in the PFCS. We then present a summary of the main current and potential impacts attributable to these fisheries on the exploited species themselves and on other components of the ecosystems in this area. Next, we describe the main fisheries management efforts carried out for ecosystems and populations. Finally, as a corollary to the information presented, we provide a set of recommendations that we believe are fundamental to mitigate the impacts of fishing activities and promote the conservation of PFCS ecosystems.

3 Results

3.1 Development of Chile’s Patagonian Fjord and Channel System’s Primary Fisheries

3.1.1 Benthic Fisheries

Landings in the Los Lagos and Aysén Regions in 2019 of 192,891 t of benthic species in the PFCS were concentrated in sea urchin, Loxechinus albus, algae (e.g. Gracilaria chilensis, Gigartina skotsbergii and Sarcothalia crispata) and mollusks (e.g. Venus antiqua, Concholepas concholepas). In the Magallanes Region, urchins, algae and crustaceans such as the king crab (Lithodes santolla) make up the vast majority of the catch (Fig. 2). Landings of sea urchin, the main benthic fishery of the PFCS, were 31,455 t in 2019, equivalent to 95% of the national landings and close to 50% of the world landings. Since the end of the twentieth century Chile has been the main world producer of this species [15].

Fig. 2
6 stacked bar graphs of artisanal landings of the main benthic resources and fish in the Patagonian and channel system. They plot landings versus years 1945 to 2015. Magallanes has the least landings with Los Lagos the highest.

Source Department of Fisheries and Hunting (1945–1959) and (1960–1977) [14]; National Fishery Service [52] (in Spanish Servicio Nacional de Pesca, SERNAPESCA

Artisanal landings of the main benthic resources (left) and fish (right) in the Patagonian fjord and channel system, Chile. Sea urchin (Loxechinus albus), golden conger eel (Genypterus blacodes), southern hake (Merluccius australis), austral sardine (Sprattus fuegensis).

Full size image

Although the levels of underreported and illegal harvest by the benthic fleet have not been evaluated in the PFCS, the information available for other areas of the country indicates that they could be very high. For example, illegal fishing for loco could represent 60–100% of the landings reported annually by the National Fisheries Service [3, 9, 17, 40]. Illegal and underreported fishing are more likely in the southern PFCS, due to the local geography. There is practically no monitoring or recording of loco harvest in the Aysén Region due to the ban established in 2001 on extracting loco in all open access areas (outside of AMERBs) located between Arica and Aysén, and the restrictions on capture and sale related to contamination with marine biotoxins since the late 1990s in this region [25]. Given the presence of the benthic fleet in the Aysén and Los Lagos Regions, in addition to the fleet that provides services to aquaculture (which includes divers), it is estimated that the actual catch of loco significantly exceeds the modest official landing figures of approximately 7 t per year which were reported over the last ten years in the Aysén Region (www.sernapesca.cl). Illegal harvest is also a significant though unquantified concern for sea urchin, crab and king crab, due to the presence of 400–600 divers that provide services to the 220 aquaculture farms that operate in this region.

The number of benthic species exploited and recorded in the PFCS fishery increased by approximately five times between the 1950s and 2000, reaching 44 species in 2019. In the Los Lagos Region, 42 species were extracted, almost twice as many as in Aysén (27 species) and Magallanes (25 species). This greater diversity in Los Lagos is associated with a larger number of areas of fishing origins or natural “banks” (Fig. 1b, [26], whose exploitation follows an unplanned pattern of temporal and spatial rotation of exploited areas and resource species [38].

The current status and dynamics of the populations of benthic species exploited in the PFCS are poorly known, to the point that thus far only one of these fisheries is subject to regulation based on biological criteria and evaluated quantitatively. Only the urchin fishery has sufficiently developed stock assessment models for its eventual management [10, 46]. This gap in management stems from the limited availability of data on catches and fishing effort, the absence of direct abundance assessments and the unknown scale of underreported and illegal harvest. There is also limited knowledge of key aspects of the structure of exploited and unexploited PFCS populations [26], including the identification and distribution of population units, which are assumed to be distributed according to source and sink habitats [44] and interconnected through larval dispersal following a meta-population scheme [37].

An additional concern of growing importance for the sustainability of these fisheries lies in the potential negative effects of other activities that take place along the coastline, especially in the Chiloé ecoregion. Among these impacts are the increasing discharges of sediments, nutrients, and chemicals associated with aquaculture [7], agriculture, urban development and deforestation.

3.1.2 Fish Fisheries

The fisheries operating in the PFCS are of relatively recent origin (1980 onward). The southern hake Merluccius australis fishery stands out as a primary target species, having almost completely replaced the traditional blennie (Eleginops maclovinus) and silverside (Odontesthes regia) fisheries, which were mostly destined for local consumption. Along with these changes in target species, important changes have been observed in the number and socioeconomic profile of artisanal fishermen and in the resource species management system (Law No. 19,892 and its amendments). All this has led to an important governance crisis, aggravated by a context in which all artisanal fisheries subject to stock assessments are in the overexploited category [56].

3.1.3 Demersal Fisheries

The demersal fisheries operating in the PFCS have developed rapidly since 1984, reaching maximum annual landings of over 30,000 t between 1986 and 1988 (Fig. 2). This period was part of the social, economic, and environmental phenomenon known as “hake fever”, characterized by the massive incorporation of new artisanal fishermen, generally from other fisheries, trades and/or geographic areas, primarily in pursuit of southern hake. These fishermen generated a spontaneous and transitory process of settlement of approximately 15 areas located around the Moraleda and costal channels, whose floating population reached over 5,000 people [28].

A photograph of different fishing boats tied by an island on the ocean.

Artisanal fishing boats in Los Lagos Región, northPatagonia

Given the progressive drop in yields and catch quotas for southern hake evident at the end of the twentieth century, many of the fishers returned to their places of origin, and most of the camps were abandoned. However, two of these, Puerto Gala and Puerto Gaviota, came to be recognized by the State as permanent localities, although their populations were reduced to only 80 and 67 inhabitants, respectively, according to the 2017 census. Although all PFCS demersal fisheries are artisanal (boats <18 m), their fishing power (number of hooks) in the mid- and late 1980s reached levels similar to those of the industrial fleet harvesting this species in the adjacent ocean. Thus, the sum of both efforts has had an evident impact on the abundance of southern hake, whose official landings within the PFCS have fallen from a historical maximum of 30,200 t in 1983 to approximately 12,700 t in 2008–2010, and approximately 6300 t annually over the last seven years (Fig. 2). This last reduction, however, is not the result of lower fishing yields but rather of the enactment of Law 20,657, which in 2013 modified the General Fisheries and Aquaculture Act (Law No. 18,892 of 1989) and resulted in a reduction of close to 40% in annual catch quotas. This last drop in official landings seems to be compensated to a large extent by a significant increase in the underreported and illegal harvest, which could exceed 50% of the officially reported catch (E.J. Niklitschek, unpublished data; also see Oyanedel et al. [41], for the common hake, Merluccius gayi, in central Chile).

3.1.4 Pelagic Fisheries

The main pelagic fisheries currently exploited in the PFCS are the purse seine fishery for austral sardine, Sprattus fuegensis, and the illegal fishery for feral free-living salmonids. Commercial exploitation of the austral sardine began in the 1980s, with the purpose of providing bait for demersal fisheries. In the mid-1980s this species also began to be caught for fishmeal production, reaching reported landings of approximately 60,000 t between 2007 and 2009 (Fig. 2). Exploitation for fishmeal was initially concentrated in the Los Lagos Region, particularly in the Gulf of Ancud, but expanded to the Aysén Region in 2012, where it is of relatively less importace than in Los Lagos Region. The exploitation of free-living salmonid fisheries in the PFCS is the consequence of more than a century of repeated introductions of these species in Chile and Argentina [4] and more than three decades of massive escapes from farming centers [1]. Feral and escaped species of the genera Oncorhynchus and Salmo now support illegal and undocumented pelagic fisheries but are of growing sociopolitical and ecological importance [50].

With regard to the sustainability of these fisheries, the population of austral sardine showed clear signs of depletion as of 2010, at which time landings fell to less than 30,000 t per year, and the fleet was incapable of catching the annual quotas allowed by the national fishing authority. The real magnitude of underreported and illegal catch in the austral sardine fishery for fishmeal and for bait are unknown. The salmonid fishery, in contrast, depends on massive escapes of salmonids from aquaculture centers rather than on the abundance of already feral populations. Thus, it represents a fishery of opportunity, and contributes to mitigating the impacts of such escapes.

3.2 Effects of Fisheries on Patagonian Marine Ecosystems

3.2.1 Benthic Fisheries

While knowledge of the richness and biodiversity of benthic species in the PFCS has slowly advanced (e.g. [5, 18, 19, 61]), there are no systematic and sustained evaluations of the effects of fisheries, aquaculture and other activities on benthic species, their associated communities, or in general on the ecosystems of the PFCS. Given the information available for this and other exploited systems, it is to be expected that the removal of predators such as crab or king crab, as well as ecosystem engineering species [24] which form dense patches or banks and provide additional structure and shelter to the substrate (e.g. algae, mussels, sea urchins), tends to reduce local diversity (Fig. 3, [11, 19, 32]). Evidence of this has already been detected in the PFCS for exploited urchin banks, where an inverse relationship between exploitation indicators (i.e. size truncation) and associated community diversity has been observed [12].

Fig. 3
A chart of potential direct and indirect effects on target and non-target fishery species. Golden conger eel, rays, sharks, southern hake, austral sardine, king crab, Chilean abalone, and sea urchin are fished. Prey ability of sharks, southern hake, sea lions, dolphins, and seabirds are reduced.

Schematic and simplified representation of some potential direct and indirect effects on target and non-target fishery species present in the Patagonian fjords and channel system’s main fisheries

Full size image

The ecological effects of the reduced availability of locos, urchins, clams and other invertebrates on birds and aquatic mammals that use feeding and/or breeding areas within the PFCS are not fully known (Fig. 3). Of particular interest are the effects on threatened species such as coscoroba swan (Coscoroba coscoroba), widgeon (Phalacrocorax gaimardi), and otters (Lontra felina and provocax) [13, 22, 53].

3.2.2 Demersal Fisheries

Although there has been little assessment of the direct and indirect impacts of demersal fisheries on PFCS populations (Fig. 3), the progressive reduction in the distribution and abundance of non-target demersal species subject to bycatch and often discarded, is evident and recognized by the fishermen themselves, particularly in the case of the Patagonian toothfish (Macruronus magellanicus) (E.J. Niklitschek, unpublished data). Even without formal evidence, similar effects are expected on elasmobranch (such as shark and ray) populations present in this system [49], which overlap spatially and vertically with demersal fisheries, and whose distribution, abundance, conservation status and ecological roles are virtually unknown in the PFCS. This bycatch of Elasmobranchii adds to the artisanal fleet’s seasonal targeting of flitting skate (Zearaja chilensis) and thornback ray (Dipturus trachyderma).

The PFCS also plays an essential role as a nursery and feeding area for different species of demersal fish, which have recognized ecological and commercial importance in coastal areas of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans [6, 59]. Three species stand out: southern hake, golden conger eel (Genyperus blacodes) and Patagonian toothfish. The southern hake and golden conger eel are top predators at depths beyond the regular reach of the birds and mammals that dominate this system (>200 m); the southern hake, which is essentially piscivorous, exerts strong trophic pressure on meso-pelagic species such as the Patagonian toothfish. The golden conger eel, with more territorial habits and a more diverse diet, exerts the same effect on invertebrates and benthic-demersal fish [35]. Reaching the highest abundances within this group, the Patagonian toothfish plays a fundamental role in the vertical transfer of energy as a consumer of crustaceans (e.g. Euphausiidae and Munida spp.) and small pelagic and meso-pelagic fish, and as the main prey of the southern hake [35]. Given the trophic role indicated above, it is expected that the substantial reduction in the abundances of exploited demersal fishes in the PFCS has generated, and is generating, important ecosystem effects [20], which have not been quantified and could affect the structure and function of the entire ecosystem and its communities, as has been observed in other highly exploited gadid fisheries [8]. It is also highly likely that the reduction of these fish has directly impacted piscivorous mammals such as the common sea lion (Otaria flavescens), whose feeding dives can reach 200 m depth and whose consumption of demersal fish may represent >67% of their diet [51].

Finally, given the importance of the PFCS as the main breeding area for southern hake and feeding grounds for juvenile Patagonian toothfish, it is likely that local fishing, added to aquaculture and other human activities, are affecting the recruitment of species such as those already mentioned, whose role also seems to be key to conserving the structure and function of oceanic communities and ecosystems located beyond the PFCS and may even reach those located on the Argentine shelf [6]. These are critical environmental and fisheries issues that should be research priorities in PFCS ecosystems in the future.

3.2.3 Pelagic Fisheries

Similar to benthic and demersal fisheries, the impacts of overfishing of austral sardine on the PFCS ecosystem have scarcely been studied [35]. The austral sardine dominates and probably controls the pelagic subsystem of the PFCS, which has highly productive cycles of phytoplankton [30, 31], copepods and euphausiids [23], that are the main prey for this species [29]. The austral sardine is a fundamental prey for different stages and species of fish, birds and marine mammals [35, 45, 62].

As a result of the interactions noted above, it is highly probable that overexploitation and the consequent reduction in the abundance of austral sardine are already directly affecting the growth and survival of juvenile and adult fish, birds, and mammals whose diet depends heavily on this species (e.g. Magellan penguins; Wilson et al. [62]). There are also indirect effects derived from the reduced transfer of energy to higher trophic levels [35]. Given the population reduction of the austral sardine and other planktophagous organisms (overexploited) such as clams (Venus spp.) and blue mussels (Mytilus chilensis), the natural grazing pressure on the zooplankton of the PFCS has been reduced. The qualitative and quantitative balance between this reduced natural grazing pressure on zooplankton, the effects of urban, agricultural and aquaculture nutrient discharges on primary productivity and the increased grazing pressure exerted by artificially cultured filter feeders, mainly mussels, remains unknown.

The ecosystem consequences of the feral and escaped salmonids are somewhat more evident than in the case of the austral sardine. However, the abundance of these populations, which given the irregularity of escapes is presumed to be highly variable is unknown, as is the magnitude of the fishery, given that current regulations prevent the declaration of catches since these are considered illegal. However, the diet and trophic role played by these salmonids in the PFCS is known, albeit only superficially [36]. Notwithstanding the limited existing information, it is reasonable to assume that they have a potentially negative and substantial impact on the ecosystem and that this fishery has contributed significantly to their control. Paradoxically, while this function should be promoted or subsidized, it remains prohibited under an obsolete regulatory framework that seeks to promote sport fishing and protect salmonid aquaculture.

3.3 Management and Conservation

3.3.1 Fishery Management

The fishery management applied thus far in the PFCS has followed a monospecific approach, nominally oriented to achieve the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY; Schaefer [48]) of each exploited stock. This management approach has used a vertical and hierarchical governance model, where the MSY management objective has been defined by law (Law No. 21.134), giving little room for effective participation of stakeholders or the pursuit of other socially relevant objectives such as income stability or social sustainability.

The vertical system of governance that has predominated in the management of the country's fisheries and the PFCS, combined with the weaknesses of the evaluation, monitoring, and control systems for exploited species, has led to an important legitimacy crisis in fisheries, such as those for the sea urchin in the early 2000s and the southern hake during the 2010s. In the former case the crisis resulted in a social and territorial conflict that, after several years, led to a change in the governance paradigm and the creation of the first participatory management plan for benthic resources implemented in Chile [33]. In the case of southern hake, a significant number of fishermen began to distrust the management system and chose to exclude themselves from the legal consultation processes. Another large number of fishermen are inadvertently marginalized by the system for registration of fishermen and allocation of access rights. As a result, a growing fraction of fishermen are now openly violating the current rules on access, reporting, and extraction quotas.

In an attempt to reverse at least partially the situation described above, the State has been promoting the creation of Management Committees and the participatory generation of management plans, as established in Law 21.134. However, the effectiveness of these committees and management plans seems to be limited by several elements, among which we highlight: (i) the still vertical and centralized character of their management and funding; (ii) the narrow decision-making space assigned to them by law, including the imposition of the MSY as a management objective; and (iii) the feedback loop of distrust that has formed between government, users, and scientists.

3.3.2 Allocation of Territorial Use Rights

An important attempt to reverse the hierarchical paradigm mentioned above and move toward co-management was the allocation of territorial rights through the system of AMERBs. However, this national system has had to face the geographic and operational difficulties of the relatively transhumant exploitation system that dominates the benthic fisheries of the PFCS, which is very different from that of the central and northern areas of the country [16].

AMERBs nominally contribute approximately 2% of the benthic landings in the regions of Los Lagos (158 operational areas, 18,000 ha) and Aysén (41 operational areas, 6700 ha), while no operational AMERBs have been recorded in Magallanes since 2001. There are also AMERBs that have been declared but not yet exploited in Los Lagos (140 areas, 15,000 ha), Aysén (36 areas, 9000 ha) and Magallanes (9 areas, 1300 ha). The exploitation of AMERBs targeting loco (Concholepas concholepas), macha (Mesodesma donacium) and algae has predominated in the Los Lagos Region, while in the Aysén Region they have been progressively concentrating on sea urchin (www.sernapesca.cl). The heterogeneous productivity and the distance between some of these areas and the population centers where the fishermen, who manage them, live have become important challenges for the profitability and operation of the AMERBs in the PFCS. Although we do not have quantitative records, we estimate that an important fraction of the landings reported by these AMERBs is in reality extracted in open-access areas (C. Molinet, personal information).

3.3.3 Conservation: Planning Instruments and Territorial Protection

The first State effort explicitly aimed at identifying marine areas for conservation and preservation within the PFCS was the zoning of the coastline promoted as part of the National Policy for the Use of the Coastline, whose first trial was carried out in the Aysén Region [27]. This effort made it possible to advance the participatory and multi-sector proposal of large areas of preferential use for conservation. However, the uncertainty associated with the lack of baseline information available for the definition of these areas and the weak hierarchy of the zoning with respect to laws and regulations have prevented its effective and direct application. Nevertheless, progress has been made in the recognition of this zoning in legal instruments such as the General Fisheries and Aquaculture Act and in the revision of areas defined as Appropriate Areas for Aquaculture under that law.

As a second conservation-oriented territorial instrument, progress has slowly begun to be made in the creation of Multiple Use Marine and Coastal Protected Area (in Spanish AMCP-MU) and marine parks, including the Francisco Coloane AMCP-MU and Marine Park (672 km2) and the Seno Almirantazgo AMCP-MU (764 km2) in the Magallanes Region, the Tortel AMCP-MU (6.702 km2) and the Pitipalena-Añihué AMCP-MU (239 km2) in the Aysén Region (also see Tecklin et al. [58]). While citizen support and participation have been sought in the definition and protection of these areas, there is yet no public agency in charge of their administration, which has limited their effective implementation and the achievement of their preservation, conservation, and production objectives. The expected creation of a Biodiversity and Protected Areas Service could resolve this institutional weakness of the Chilean State [22, 57, 58].

In spite of the efforts already described, recent revisions of the limits of national parks and reserves of the National System Protected Areas (in Spanish SNASPE) have shown that since their creation these zones have included an important extension of adjacent marine areas. Securing the effective protection of these areas requires resolving various legal questions, both about the maritime projection of the SNASPE parks and reserves and the implications of this protection for marine activities such as fishing and aquaculture [58].

It is very important to recognize that neither the zoning of the coastline, the creation of marine reserves or parks, nor the protection of marine areas adjacent to the SNASPE have obeyed marine conservation plans, objectives, or goals defined nationally or regionally. Except for the strategic plan and the national definition of priority sites and species, there are no public or private master plans to guide this task under the Convention on Biological Diversity 2011–2020 (www.biodiversidad.mma.gov.cl) [58]. There are only a few scientific exercises that have applied tools for the identification of priority conservation areas [21, 22, 39, 60].

4 Recommendations

Given the lack of knowledge on the impacts of fisheries on PFCS ecosystems and conservation, we recommend the following:

  • Advance toward the use of new models of governance for Patagonian fisheries that are more participatory and inclusive, and increase the confidence, acceptance, and respect of the actors for the mechanisms of monitoring, evaluation, reporting and resource management. One tool that can contribute to this is the participatory design and quantitative evaluation of management strategies in the Management Committees, administered by the Undersecretary of Fisheries, including the design of non-demographic performance indicators and empirical decision rules, appropriate for the data-poor fisheries that predominate in the area.

  • Strengthen fisheries monitoring programs and integrate the different monitoring efforts to obtain an ecosystem vision that includes both the status of fishery populations of interest and also that of other vulnerable populations, biodiversity, and ecosystem services [21].

  • Move toward multispecies and/or ecosystem management models aimed at conserving ecosystem structure and function within acceptable limits, considering, for example, the trophic demand of top predators. Particular attention should be given to the requirements of these species during their reproductive periods, considering the possible effects of climate change.

  • Design and implement a regional plan to improve management, make protection effective and increase the number and surface area of marine protected areas in the PFCS, in order to form a network aimed at protecting (i) highly vulnerable ecosystems and/or communities such as those defined by cold water corals; (ii) a significant fraction of the diversity of benthic habitats and communities existing in the PFCS; and (iii) essential habitats used by mammals, birds and fish that sustain their reproductive processes. These should have management and monitoring plans, whose objectives and management are consistent and complementary to the objectives and management of other existing territorial units (e.g. AMERBs and genetic reserves) and with existing productive development plans such as the current fishery management plans.

  • Facilitate informed and timely territorial decision-making, including the definition of an effective system of protected areas. It is essential to make a multi-year and systematic investment effort, similar to the census of marine life, aimed at increasing and updating the available knowledge on the diversity and spatial distribution of biotopes, species, communities and essential habitats.