Keywords

1 Introduction

There is worldwide consensus that the oceans are in crisis, that fisheries are in decline, that the numbers of endangered species are increasing, and that different ecosystems have been damaged or destroyed due to anthropogenic pressures [69]. However, according to [21], over the coming decades there are still opportunities to rebuild marine life and ecosystem functions if the main pressures affecting the oceans can be mitigated by 2050. Very few places on Earth can be considered totally pristine, not even remote Chilean Patagonia. This area has sustained local livelihoods for thousands of years [7], has had episodes of excessive exploitation in the near past, and today maintains an important artisanal and industrial fishing sector [62], intense maritime transport and is the neuralgic center of the Chilean salmon and mussel aquaculture industry [59].

Chilean Patagonia’s marine ecosystems have been described as biodiversity hotspots, particularly for high trophic level predator species such as marine birds and mammals. These groups have been recommended as focal species for the development of management and conservation proposals [41] due to their emblematic character, ecological roles, potential as key species in the habitats where they are found or because of their characteristics as umbrella species. These groups of animals can act as indicators of ecosystem health, since changes in their distribution, abundance, behavioral patterns and/or trophic ecology may reflect important changes in the environment, whether these are of natural or anthropogenic origin [11].

Marine protected areas have been proposed as a means of conserving Chilean Patagonia’s marine ecosystems. However, it is not yet clear if these initiatives are sufficient to represent biodiversity adequately or if they are the optimum tool for conservation. This is in a region where a series of actors, often with conflicting interests, coexist and exert intense pressure on ecosystems and marine resources [34, 62]. The approach proposed in this chapter is to use seabirds and marine mammals as focal species to achieve broad conservation objectives. Focal species have been defined as those that warrant conservation interest because they possess characteristics that identify them as functionally important, key, umbrella, indicator, flagship, vulnerable or sensitive species, and therefore are useful for consideration both in the selection and delimitation of conservation initiatives and in planning and management, including research and monitoring.

2 Scope and Objectives

The objective of this chapter is to evaluate the state of knowledge and conservation of birds and marine mammals that inhabit Chilean Patagonia in the context of the history of exploitation and threats In this region. The aim is to identify gaps, challenges and opportunities for improvement to promote appropriate and effective management actions using the concept of focal species.

3 Methods

The mainstream and gray literature available for Chilean Patagonia between Reloncaví Sound and the Diego Ramírez islands (41° 42'S 73° 02'W; 56° 29'S 68° 44'W) was reviewed to identify the most relevant aspects of the biology of seabird and marine mammal species, the threats that affect them and the alternatives available to conserve these groups in their ecosystems. The authors’ experience of more than two decades on these issues, both in Patagonia and in other parts of Chile, is added to this search. We distinguished two major Patagonian marine areas for this study: (i) the Chiloense Marine Ecoregion or northern Patagonia, ca. 41°–47°S [42], and (ii), the Channels and Fjords Marine Ecoregion of southern Chile or southern Patagonia, ca. 47°–56°S [101].

4 Results

4.1 Patagonia’s Marine Ecosystems: a Hotspot for Focal Species

Chilean Patagonia extends linearly for more than 1,600 km of continental coastline, including 100,627 km of coastline and 40,050 islands [93], with a high degree of geomorphological and hydrographic complexity [74, 89]. These factors, added to the high variability of meteorological conditions, create ecosystems that are considered structurally and functionally unique. The oceanographic characteristics of the marine ecosystems of Chile's Patagonian fjords and channels generally have a permanent influx of Subantarctic oceanic water through channels and gulfs, which has higher temperature, nutrient concentration and salinity than the water in the interior zone. This oceanic water mixes in the coastal zone with freshwater generated by high precipitation, glacial melt and coastal runoff, thus producing a mega-estuarine system of positive circulation [73], Pickard and [74, 88]. The freshwater body is generally devoid of nutrients (except silicic acid), but contains high concentrations of particulate and dissolved organic matter [30]. The large Patagonian ice fields (North, South, Muñoz-Gamero, Santa Inés and Darwin) between 46°S and 48°S are considered valuable freshwater reservoirs of global importance and have a profound influence on the functioning of the marine ecosystems [68, 81]. Estuarine areas serve as habitat for many marine species during some phase of their lives. This includes several commercially important fish species that spawn on the open coasts of the Chonos Archipelago and Guafo Island, and whose eggs and larvae have been detected in the inland waters of the fjords and channels, which are thought to serve as nurseries in this initial life phase [8].

Several studies have reported the high productivity of inland Patagonian waters, particularly during spring, as reflected by the high growth rates of phytoplankton [49], which in turn favor the abundance of planktonic herbivores and carnivores [67]. Planktonic crustaceans, particularly copepods and euphausiids (krill), predominate in abundance in Patagonian fjords and channels. Euphausia valentinii is the most abundant euphausiid in Chilean Patagonia [67] and is considered a key species, as it establishes an ecological link between microplankton and higher trophic levels (i.e. fish, penguins and whales; [31]. The squat lobster (Munida gregaria/subrugosa) may constitute more than 50% of the macrobenthic invertebrate biomass [6], it is the most abundant decapod in the coastal waters of Tierra del Fuego, with abundance as high as 27 individuals/m2 [33]. This species is preyed upon by a variety of higher order predators, including whales, dolphins, sea lions, birds, fish, spider crabs and octopuses. It is hypothesized that they are a direct trophic link between the detritus and the larger predators [83].

Due to this primary and secondary productivity, Chilean Patagonia is home to important populations of higher order predators such as seabirds and marine mammals. Some of these species are migratory, such as blue and humpback whales, as well as numerous seabirds (albatrosses, shearwaters, terns), while others are resident and maintain an annual presence in the area, such as sea lions, otters, dolphins, porpoises, black-browed albatrosses, imperial cormorants and Magellan penguins, among others [42, 98, 100]. Approximately 56 species of marine mammals have been recorded in Chile, representing 42% of the species richness of this functional group globally. A total of 32 species of cetaceans have been recorded in Chilean Patagonia, out of approximately 44 species present throughout the country [3], and 6 species of marine carnivores (sea lions, fur seals, seals and otters, [95] (Table 1). Until very recently, most of the information available in the literature on marine mammals in Chilean Patagonia was data collected during the whaling season through opportunistic sightings, strandings, range updates and osteological material, most of which is scattered in technical reports, conference reports and unpublished scientific papers [98].

Table 1 List of bird and marine mammal species recorded for Chilean Patagonia, including their conservation status according to the Red List of the International Union for Conservation of Nature* and the Chilean Ministry of the Environment** (in Spanish Ministerio del Medio Ambiente, MMA)
Full size table

Among the most outstanding features that have been reported recently for marine mammals in northern Patagonia is the presence of an important feeding and nursing area for blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) [39]. Historical information from 1907 [94] indicates that masses of blue whales were common in the Gulf of Corcovado. However, the extraordinary presence of this species in the area was soon forgotten, and it was almost 100 years before the return of this species to this historic site was observed. An important feeding area for humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) has been described in the Strait of Magellan (southern Patagonia, around Carlos III Island), and is the first such area recognized for the entire southeastern Pacific [26]. An additional area was later described in northern Patagonia [43]. Other species of large cetaceans frequently observed in feeding and/or transit behavior in Chilean Patagonia include sei or Rudolphi's whales (Balaenoptera borealis), fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), southern right whales (Eubalena australis), common and Antarctic minke (Balaenoptera bonaerensis, B. acutorostrata) and sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) [3, 40, 42, 98].

There are at least 19 species of small cetaceans in the region (dolphins, ziphids and porpoises), including the Chilean dolphin (Cephalorhynchus eutropia), which is the only cetacean species endemic to Chile [100]. Four species of pinnipeds (sea lions and seals) have also been recorded,the most abundant are the common sea lion or fur seal (Otaria byronia) and the southern fur seal (Arctocephalus australis), which reproduce in the area. Although important knowledge gaps remain regarding the ecology of marine mammals and the marine systems on which they depend in this region, this gap is slowly being filled by systematic studies that have reported on the distribution, abundance, habitat modeling, behavioral and movement patterns, as well as the ecological determinants of these different processes [9, 10, 35, 39, 40, 43, 98,99,100]. These studies demonstrated that seasonal and spatial primary productivity is an important indicator of the meso-scale distribution and movement patterns of whales. At a finer scale, studies (particularly in dolphins) have shown how certain oceanographic processes (e.g. tidal fronts and currents), the influence of rivers and freshwater, as well as habitats formed by macroalgal/kelp forests, are of great importance for habitat selection and essential biological behaviors such as reproduction and feeding.

One hundred and nine seabird species have been recorded in Patagonia [85], which represents 30% of the national species richness. Chilean Patagonia is home to nearly 50% of the seabirds recorded in Chile (Table 1). These figures make the Patagonian region an area of great importance in terms of seabird species richness for Chile and the world. An important number of seabirds that inhabit or visit Chilean Patagonia are high trophic level predators. The most common albatross species in Patagonia is the black-browed albatross (Thalassarche melanophris), which reaches its highest abundance in summer at breeding sites located in southern Patagonia. At least six colonies of this species have been documented between 51–56°S, totaling > 134,000 pairs [5, 55, 58, 82]. The sooty shearwater (Ardenna grisea) is the most abundant species in northern Patagonia during the summer months, when it arrives in large numbers to breed [79]. It is frequently observed in flocks of thousands of individuals, especially during their migrations. Breeding colonies of this species have been identified on the Metalqui, Guamblin, and Guafo islands. The last of these has an estimated population of over 4 million breeding pairs [79], and colonies have up to 300,000 pairs on the Wollaston and Hermite islands [86]. Another species that maintains an important population in Chilean Patagonia is the Magellanic penguin (Spheniscus magellanicus). Boersma et al. [12] estimated that there are at least 23 colonies of this species with > 144,000 pairs between 41–55°S. [76] estimated at least 12 nesting sites of southern rockhopper penguin (Eudyptes chrysocome) in southern Patagonia, with > 396,000 pairs. [19] mentioned 12 colonies of macaroni penguin (Eudyptes chrysolophus) in southern Patagonia, but the population size in this area is undetermined and apparently declining.

Other seabird species that visit Chilean Patagonia include the wandering albatross (Diomedea exulans), northern royal albatross (Diomedea sanfordi), southern royal albatross (Diomedea epomophora), Salvin's albatross (Thalassarche salvini) and the Westland petrel (Procellaria westlandica). The Antarctic giant petrel (Macronectes giganteus), the southern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialoides), the Magellanic diving-petrel (Pelecanoides magellani) and the Wilson’s storm-petrel (Oceanites oceanicus) are other relatively common Procellariiformes at certain times of the year, many of which nest in the region [15, 46, 86].

In summary, Chilean Patagonia contains a high diversity of focal species of birds and marine mammals. This diversity could be explained by the significant heterogeneity of Patagonia's environment, its primary and secondary productivity, and the processes that sustain them. Compared to other areas of Chile, and certainly the world, this vast region is home to emblematic animal groups, many of which are classified as vulnerable or endangered (IUCN, 2018), and which are potentially key to the functioning of the ecosystems located here (Table 1). The presence of these species groups is a great opportunity to boost conservation efforts under a focal or umbrella species approach.

4.2 Areas Identified as Relevant for Marine Biodiversity in Chilean Patagonia

One of the most interesting prioritization exercises, due to its large geographic scope, was carried out for the Chiloense Marine Ecoregion; it identified 13 ecologically important areas suitable for recommendation as MPAs (for details see Fig. 1 in [42]. This exercise, the first of its kind in Chile, was performed using MARXAN software [104], it incorporated the best available information on ecological aspects (e.g. species, bio-oceanographic processes, ecosystems) and human aspects (e.g. costs). The identification of sites of conservation importance was guided by three main criteria, to: (i) represent the critical biodiversity of the Chiloense ecoregion; (ii) reflect the threats in the area and (iii) incorporate the working scale of ecoregions. A second exercise was conducted for the southern Patagonia region [101], it identified 33 ecologically important areas (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
A map of Chilean Patagonia with high conservation value areas. They are mostly distributed along the southeastern frontier, the centeral western, and several scattered patches in the northwest.

Map of high conservation value areas in chilean patagonia (modified from [42] and [101])

Full size image

4.3 Current and Potential Threats: Challenges and Obstacles for the Conservation of Marine Ecosystems in Chilean Patagonia

Chilean Patagonia has been occupied by humans for over 10,000 years. Until the early nineteenth century, this occupation included only subsistence uses by the five native peoples that inhabited this region [7]. Subsequently, human occupation in Patagonia was encouraged through processes of intensive natural resource extraction by people who saw this area as a place to obtain profit and then leave. Beginning at the end of the nineteenth century, sea lions (common and fur seals) and otters (chungungo or marine otter and huillín or southern river otter) were an important focus of exploitation [61]. Heavy hunting pressure on these species brought them to the brink of extinction and was followed closely and in parallel by the hunting of large cetaceans, primarily right, blue, humpback and sperm whales in the Gulf of Corcovado and exposed coast of Chiloé [78].

Although there is no current economic activity based on hunting these species, there is strong pressure on the proper functioning and sustainability of marine ecosystems, as well as on the species that inhabit them. Aquaculture, industrial and artisanal fishing, as well as coastal development projects, tourism, and transportation stand out as major threats [32, 59]. All these activities produce a number of ecological impacts or effects on marine mammal and bird species (Figures 1 and 2). The population status of more than 95% of the major fishery resource species in Chile is uncertain or clearly overexploited [70]. Six species of high commercial importance in Patagonia are considered overexploited or collapsed fisheries: southern hake, hoki and southern blue whitting (Merluccius australis, Macruronus magellanicus, and Micromesistius australis, respectively), sea urchin (Loxechinus albus), loco (Concholepas concholepas) and deep-sea cod (Dissostichus eleginoides) [62]. The negative interaction between fisheries and non-target marine fauna is little studied in Chile. These interactions have only been evaluated in a few cases, primarily between mammals and seabirds and fisheries (e.g. [20, 40, 45, 63, 87].

Mortality of the white-chinned petrel (Procellaria aequinoctialis) by artisanal longline fleets of southern hake and deep-sea cod has been reported in northern Patagonia. [91] indicated that mortality of Magellan penguin and sooty shearwater in gill nets is common in this area. Of great concern is a recent study by the [47], which estimated that between 2015 and 2018, more than 10,000 (95% CI = 6,898- 16,670) black-browed albatrosses died as result of interactions with trawlers in the southern austral demersal fishery. Since its large-scale implementation in Chilean waters in the early 1980s, the aquaculture industry has increased its initial production more than 140 times, especially in the Los Lagos Region (northern Patagonia) where > 90% of national production is located. Chile is currently the second largest producer of salmonids in the world (485,000 t/year). The production of the blue mussel (Mytilus edulis chilensis) (58,000 t/year), although less important than that of salmon, is considered one of the most significant such industries in the Southern Hemisphere.Footnote 1 Mussel aquaculture occurs massively in coastal waters and does not require nets, cages, or supplementary feed. However, cultivation of these mollusks occupies large areas and can cause significant organic enrichment, mainly on the seafloor, due to high bio-deposition rates (fecal and pseudo-fecal), as well as the frequent detachment of mussels from suspended systems. These events significantly alter the chemical composition of the sediment and reduce the amount of available oxygen [18]. Little is known about how these crops impact birds and marine mammals, with the exception of the habitat displacement and spatial disturbance that the crop structures impose on Chilean dolphins [80], and the contrasting potential benefit as a food and resting source for the flightless steamer-duck (Tachyeres pteneres) [60].

Intensive salmon farming in Chile has considerable impacts on the marine environment [13], since the activity is based on supplementary feeding (food rich in phosphorus and nitrogen), the use of significant quantities of antibiotics and other chemicals (e.g. pesticides, disinfectants, antifoulants), as well as the presence of cages, anchorages and nets, and the constant re-supply by sea. This industry has different impacts on the marine ecosystems of Patagonia [13]. Interactions between aquaculture and marine mammals are often negative, as mammals are affected by habitat loss, gunfire used to deter approaches (mainly sea lions) and accidental entanglement in sea lion protection nets or anchoring lines [43, 77, 80]. However, the indirect negative effect that the industry generates on ecosystems is probably much more relevant, with the massive escapes of these exotic and eurytrophic species, the spread of parasites and diseases to native species, eutrophication and anoxia of entire fjords, among many other impacts [59, 62].

As human activities intensify in Chilean Patagonia (particularly salmon farming), so does maritime traffic, which has been widely recognized as an important factor affecting seabird and marine mammal populations. The risk of collision represents a danger to these species [54], and also the underwater noise generated by cavitation can generate changes in behavior, distribution, abundance and population dynamics [36]. Main shipping routes are located between Puerto Montt and Aysén Fjord as result of the increased transport of cargo, fuel, tourist activities, aquaculture and fishing. A recent study by [10] identified three potentially conflictive zones due to the overlap between important areas for blue whales, salmon farming concessions and the density of maritime traffic. These are the Gulf of Ancud in the Chiloé inland sea, the Corcovado Gulf and the Moraleda Channel (Fig. 2). Collisions with blue whales and sei whales have been recorded recently, both species whose conservation status is of concern, and which are probably unable to sustain much mortality in addition to natural mortality (Fig. 2) [41, 10].

Fig. 2
A map of northern Patagonia and 2 photos. A. Traffic density decreases eastward from the southeastern Pacific Ocean. B. A photo of a dead whale floating on the sea. C. A photo of a blue whale floating above the water near the shore. A motorboat halts beside with a few people on it.

(Source www.globalfishingwatch.org). Dots in dark blue indicate salmon farming concessions in 2013. (Source www.subpesca.cl). b Dead blue whale floating near Puerto Montt with fractured jaw and pectoral fin (Source El Llanquihue, front page, 13 February, 2014). c Blue whale stranded in Melimoyu bay (Commune of Puerto Cisnes) with the caudal fin severed at its base, most likely by a propeller (Source El Diario de Aysén, 24 February 2017)

a Maritime traffic in northern Patagonia and its overlap with areas that include 20% of the highest predicted densities for blue whales [10] (red polygons). The raster gradient (from light gray to green) indicates the density of ship positions per km2 according to Automatic Identification System (AIS) data averaged from 2012 to 2016.

Full size image

Other environmental impacts resulting from oil spills have not been investigated and are only scarcely monitored. Examples include the May 2001 spill from the Panamanian-flagged oil tanker José Fuchs, which released 440 t of crude oil along 120 km of coastline in the southern area of the Moraleda Channel, and the July, 2019 spill of 40 thousand liters of diesel oil off Guarello Island by a mining company north of the Kawésqar National Reserve [16].

In addition to increased boat traffic, one of the most pervasive and long-lasting human impacts is the generation of pollution, including plastic accumulation and fragmentation. Almost 80% of global floating marine debris comes from coastal human settlements, while the remaining 20% comes from vessels and ocean platforms [16]. Floating garbage is a threat to hundreds of species of birds, mammals, sea turtles and fish, which tend to become entangled, drown or suffer damage to their digestive systems [53]. It is common in Patagonia to observe large amounts of garbage, including plastic bags, ropes and net debris (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
3 photos of garbage piling up near the coastal areas. It includes large boxes, tubes, and cartons.

(© R. Hucke-Gaete)

Examples of beaches with an accumulation of anthropogenic garbage near Puerto Aguirre, northern Patagonia. Plastic debris found throughout the area's beaches come from salmon farming activities, as well as household and fishing waste

Full size image

Hinojosa [37] reported that between 1 and 50 items/km2 of floating marine debris were recorded in northern Patagonia during seven Maritime Training and Instruction Center cruises between 2002 and 2005. This is substantially higher than the numbers reported for open coastal waters (0.01–25 items/km2) and very close to values reported for semi-enclosed bays in highly populated regions around the World (40 items/km2). This figure increases considerably in Chiloe’s inner sea, where the maximum abundance of garbage was found: 250 items/km2; 80% of this was extruded polystyrene foam (styrofoam) and the rest included plastic fragments, plastic bags, ropes and salmon feed sacks. The problem persists, and it has been estimated using multispectral satellite imagery that more than 50 t of marine debris could be found along a 100 km stretch of Patagonian coastline [1], much of which can cause entanglement or obstruction of the respiratory and/or gastric tracts in species such as birds and marine mammals. This threat becomes increasingly complex to manage as plastic degrades into microparticles and fibers, which have already been recorded in sea lion feces [71], and crab stomachs in areas as isolated as Cape Horn [4].

Climate change will affect the physical, biological and biogeochemical properties of the oceans and coasts at different spatial and temporal scales, modifying their structure and ecological functions [48, 59]. These changes, in turn, will cause feedback in the climate system. The environmental stress in which the oceans find themselves, due to a combination of various factors, will affect the resilience of some marine ecosystems to climate change. Variations in the exchange of freshwater and matter between oceanic and terrestrial and coastal systems in Chilean Patagonia, triggered by climate change or direct human activities, are projected to affect the cycling of nutrients and carbon and therefore the health of coastal fjord ecosystems [50]. Harmful algal blooms (HABs) worldwide have increased in frequency, magnitude, intensity and geographic extent in recent decades [65]. This is especially critical in Chilean Patagonia, with historically recurrent but increasingly intense HAB events [59]. The largest mass mortality of sei whales ever recorded in the world (more than 343 individuals) was observed south of the Taitao Peninsula during the summer of 2015; the event was attributed to an intense HAB during an El Niño event [33]. Another event was observed in the summer of 2016 that caused massive mortality of invertebrates and fish, generating losses greater than US$ 800 million and sanitary problems due to more than 40,000 t of decomposing biomass [56]. In addition to HABs, an increase in populations of predatory gelatinous organisms (cnidarians and ctenophores) has been detected in recent decades in various marine ecosystems, attributed to climate change and/or fisheries that have eliminated natural predators of these organisms [75]. Gelatinous organisms are voracious predators that can affect the structure and dynamics of pelagic communities by consuming a wide variety of herbivorous zooplankters and fish in early stages [67]. For example, the massive proliferation of gelatinous filter feeder (subantarctic salp, Ilhea magalhanica) in the Chiloé Inland Sea caused fish mortality and a drastic decrease in phytoplankton cells, as well as a historical low in surface chlorophyll concentration [27].

5 Discussion

5.1 Integrated Conservation of Marine Ecosystems in Chilean Patagonia—Gaps, Challenges, and Opportunities

5.1.1 The Current Scenario of Marine Protection in Chilean Patagonia

Given the accumulation of evidence that marine protected areas (MPAs) contribute to the conservation of habitats and populations (Halpern, 2003) and that generates a positive spillover effect, which can maintain and even increase the overall yield of adjacent fisheries [25], the United Nations Environmental Program-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMS, 2018) has generated scenarios for their accelerated development. The global MPA surface was approximately 2 million km2 (0.7% of the oceans) in 2000. This area has increased to ca. 27 million km2 (ca. 7.5% of the oceans) since then, with more than 15,000 MPAs established around the world [97]. In Chile, however, unlike terrestrial environments, the history of MPA creation is recent and sporadic. The 176 km2 Estero Quitralco National Sanctuary was created in Chilean Patagonia in 1996; it can be considered the first MPA in Chile.

MPAs covered less than 0.5% of the total sea area of Chile’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) until 2009. In 2010, with the creation of the Motu Motiro Hiva Marine Park (150,000 km2), Chile began to play a leading role in the creation of large oceanic MPAs [23]. In the following years the country designated more than 1.4 million km2 of marine areas as MPAs, reaching more than 43% of the EEZ. This area is larger than the entire surface of continental Chile (750,000 km2) and seven times larger than the surface of the terrestrial protected areas created in the country in the last 100 years. However, more than 90% of the area protected lies in the waters of the EEZ around oceanic islands (in territories beyond 12 nautical miles from the continental coast or territorial sea): Rapa Nui and Salas y Gómez Islands, Juan Fernández Archipelago, Desventuradas Islands and Diego Ramírez Islands.

This leaves an important gap in biological representation and coverage [93] and becomes even more relevant if we consider that there are areas of high biodiversity that have no MPA coverage [42, 101].

A photo of the flukes of a giant blue whale swimming in the ocean. It appears in rear view with the rest of the body submerged in the water. Mountains appear at a distance.

Humpback whale diving in a Patagonian feeding ground, Carlos III MPA

5.1.2 Focal Species and Their Use in Conservation in Chilean Patagonia

Due to their large biomass and historical abundance, several species of marine mammals are important consumers of productivity at different trophic levels, and are considered key focal species that play an essential ecological role in maintaining the integrity of the community structure and dynamics and the flow of nutrients and energy [38]. Robertson et al. [82] suggested that large cetaceans could play a role analogous to marine upwellings, by lifting nutrients from the depths and releasing them to the surface as fecal material that tends to disperse rather than sink [38]. Proposed that the role of large cetaceans could be an important and little-considered essential piece to understand the high productivity of certain areas of Chilean Patagonia holistically.

Patagonian marine ecosystems have highly seasonal primary production, which results in an efficient carbon sink through sedimentation during the spring [29]. This also results in the transport and exchange of significant amounts of organic matter between terrestrial and marine systems, being the main contributor to the carbon flux of coastal marine ecosystems [84, 102]. Chilean fjord lands have recently been identified as carbon sinks [50], and it is suggested that Chilean Patagonia likely captures more CO2 than is released on the coast of northern Chile [96]. Because considerable aggregations of whales feed throughout Chilean Patagonia during austral summer and autumn, the potential influence on the dynamics of primary productivity and ecological processes facilitated by this megafauna in the biogeochemical carbon cycle should be explored [22, 57]. Proposed that Chilean Patagonia be considered a climatic refuge where the recovery and maintenance of the integrity of marine ecosystems is promoted, pressures on them are reduced and thus ecosystem functions and services are strengthened. By promoting this, Chilean Patagonia would reinforce global efforts to mitigate the impact of climate change as a nature-based solution.

Important advances have been made in Chilean Patagonia during the last decade in the identification of significant habitats, or nuclei, for some important behaviors of marine mammals and birds [42, 86]. The results to date have helped to determine habitat selection, movement and distribution patterns associated with environmental and oceanographic conditions and factors that trigger these processes. The approach is to establish conservation and management efforts in those areas in such a way that the relatively well-understood focal species function as umbrella species, so that the conservation of their habitat also extends protection to less visible species. These species should also be considered indicators and incorporated into MPA management plans. According to the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources,Footnote 2 which manages Southern Ocean fishery resource species from an ecosystem perspective, an indicator species must show a measurable response to changes in the availability of exploited species. This could, for example, include variations in population size, reproductive success, body mass or foraging behavior. This same concept can be used to measure the effectiveness of measures implemented in MPAs through the monitoring of carefully selected indicators (e.g. duration of feeding trips, growth rate of young, reproductive success, changes in diet, condition and survival of adults). This approach can improve the cost-effectiveness and standardization of monitoring to achieve the stated management objectives, by documenting key ecosystem parameters rather than attempting to obtain full understanding of complex processes before taking appropriate adaptive measures.

5.1.3 Is the Establishment of MPAs in Chilean Patagonia the Best Marine Conservation Tool? Recommendations for a Conservation Model Under a Multi-Sectoral Approach and Marine Spatial Planning

To date, there are 34 officially decreed MPAs in Chile under different categories, representing approximately 43% of the surface area of the EEZ. With this coverage, Chile has taken an important step toward meeting the Aichi goals (protection of 10% of the sea) and has undoubtedly become a major player worldwide in the creation of MPAs, particularly in large oceanic areas. However, most of these areas do not have a management plan. The Aichi targets not only address surface area but also require that these areas be effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well- connected [14]. On that basis, we consider the State of Chile to be far from achieving this international goal. Facing the challenges for adequate and effective management of MPAs is perhaps the greatest problem that Chile and many other countries have today [28].

Notwithstanding the existence of tools for the implementation of MPAs in Chile, the formal establishment of MPAs is complex, as the range of MPA categories is under the administrative wing of different government agencies, which has a direct impact on governance systems. The agencies do not necessarily coordinate or may even be in conflict over the jurisdiction of protected areas. This also leads to ineffective use of resources and replication of actions. The long-awaited Biodiversity and Protected Areas Service could be a major solution as a coordinating entity and for the effective management of MPAs [93].

The mere fact of establishing MPAs does not guarantee success in biodiversity conservation. When MPAs are simply decreed, but resources are insufficient for effective design and management, these areas become paper parks [103]. Availability of resources is an important determinant for the success or failure of an MPA, and also the lack of social involvement and lack of coordination between government agencies trigger a flawed and ineffective governance and management system [72]. Thus, the establishment of MPAs can generate the dangerous illusion of protection when in fact this is not occurring [2]. It appears there are no longer options for additional large-scale MPAs in Chile, so the core of marine conservation guidelines in Chilean Patagonia should focus on the appropriate design of a network of small and medium-sized MPAs (100–1,000 km2). Comprehensive protection based on ecosystem and landscape management that holistically includes terrestrial and marine systems, which are so intertwined in Chilean Patagonia, is urgently needed [84, 92].

Chilean Patagonia is a geographically complex region, both because of its oceanographic, geological, cryosphere and ecological processes and because of the multiple spectra of interests and uses of marine ecosystems [42, 61, 62, 93]. It is therefore a region where decisions on the management, conservation and uses of natural resources are complex. Single solutions such as MPA designation are insufficient,attention should be channeled to multisectoral approaches. An example of such a process-oriented approach is marine spatial planning (MSP) [2], with appropriate attention to ecosystem services and human welfare in Patagonia [66]. It is important to highlight and foment the processes of macro- and micro-level coastal zoning of the administrative regions that are part of Patagonia, especially because this was established as a goal in the National Biodiversity Strategy 2017–2030. There are other tools that could contribute enormously if well implemented and carried out as part of zoning and MSP. [24] mentioned complementary or auxiliary alternatives for scaling up marine biodiversity conservation, which include business model innovations for biodiversity benefits through territorial fishing use rights (i.e. Management and Exploitation Areas for Benthic Resources) and the creation of municipal conservation areas. Both tools have demonstrated cross-cutting results in biodiversity conservation, improvement of livelihoods and the recovery of fishing stocks.

Another tool is the designation of Indigenous People's Coastal Marine Spaces (in Spanish ECMPOs), defined spaces whose administration is given to indigenous communities or associations that have exercised customary use of the space, ascertained by the National Corporation for Indigenous Development. All of the original peoples of Patagonia had and still maintain a maritime connection, including the incorporation of marine mammals into their daily lives for shelter, navigation, food, hunting and social bonding as well as in their mythology and cosmovision. Because of its recent implementation, we know little about successes or failures of ECMPOs as a conservation tool. The inclusion of these ECMPOs is certainly paramount in an MSP approach, given the high number of requests submitted to the Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture [93]. One of their roles would be to act by moderating or safeguarding areas for the use of Patagonian marine resource species, both for the benefit of the Indigenous communities and for the many other activities that take place in the region. It is important to ensure that the State Protected Areas on land in Patagonia protect the marine space of their inland waters. An interesting recent case is Kawésqar National Park (former Alacalufes Forest Reserve, ca. 28,000 km2) and the concomitant Kawésqar National Reserve (ca. 26,000 km2), which aim to conserve the marine portion of the waters adjacent to the national park. The particularity of this case is that the National Forestry Corporation (in Spanish CONAF) is in charge of both areas, and therefore the elaboration and implementation of their respective management plans [93].

The prior planning processes carried out in Chilean Patagonia [42, 101], although important for identifying possible conservation areas, should now be complemented by new processes that fill knowledge gaps through new research efforts that cover broader spatiotemporal scales, consistent with the life history of focal species. Finally, we believe that the strategic use of mammals and seabirds as focal and sentinel species in Chilean Patagonia has great conservation potential. This makes sense from an ecological perspective given the characteristics already indicated above, and because seabirds and marine mammals are emblematic groups that generate empathy in the public and are part of ecosystems that provide services for human welfare [66] through special interest tourism, for example.

6 Conclusions and Recommendations

Chilean Patagonia presents areas of great importance for marine biodiversity and is potentially a refuge from climate change [22, 59]. The generation of comprehensive conservation processes must first involve eradicating or minimizing the threats that affect this region [21]. The conservation tools to be applied in Chilean Patagonia should consider addressing the shortcomings pointed out in this study, especially those related to the current ineffectiveness of MPAs due to low or nonexistent management, governance, organization, social involvement, resources, and available funds. These conservation tools will undoubtedly be relevant if they cease to be only paper-based and are implemented along with the application of tools emanating from MSP. Marine conservation efforts in Chilean Patagonia must find a balance between social needs, current uses and the need to protect biodiversity, including political, social, private sector, academic and NGO involvement. The following are considered priority recommendations:

  • Focal species such as seabirds and marine mammals can be very useful to guide prioritization in management and conservation processes, ideally under an MSP approach, given their characteristics as umbrella, ecologically important, indicator and sentinel species. We consider it essential to minimize the anthropogenic stressors that negatively affect their populations. It is important to develop or update abundance estimates to monitor this, as well as to develop indicators of changes in the ecosystems. This should use standardized methodologies that allow us to establish trends and thus measure the effectiveness or failure of the measures implemented under an ecosystem approach.

  • We recommend narrowing the various management and knowledge gaps to permit the adequate management and conservation of marine ecosystems in Chilean Patagonia. Special emphasis should be placed on the gaps in representativeness and challenges in the adequate implementation of MPAs. It is also essential to advance the priority research topics identified by [77] related to aquaculture and its impacts, as well as to understand and promote the maintenance and restoration of the effects of marine vertebrates as essential components of ecological processes that promote carbon capture as a nature-based solution to the effects of climate change [38], see measure 4 in [22].

  • MPAs are good alternatives to promote marine conservation processes, but they are not the only tool. It is also important to promote MSP initiatives in zoning processes both nationally and regionally, and to include additional tools such as ECMPOs along with achieving effective coordination with government agencies. Of relevance are the new processes for generating management plans for terrestrial protected areas (through CONAF) whose administrative boundaries include portions of the sea (inland waters, such as canals and fjords) [93].

  • Within MSP processes it is essential to build opportunities for coordination and cooperation to define the function and role of the private sector. This is a determining aspect in the fulfillment of the objectives of different conservation tools, particularly in relation to adequate financing, which will make it possible to sustain adaptive and world-class management plans.

  • We recommend that current and future MPAs aim to include IUCN-derived standards and promote their certification through the “Green List”, an initiative that aims to recognize and increase the number of protected areas that function equitably, are well managed globally and deliver long-term conservation success.