3. MA RINE TOURISM: MANA GEMENT AND CONSERVATION
3.5. Marine conservat ion and tourism
3.4.Marine tourism and recreational fishing
Ano the r group of marin e recreation al user s and tourists who are interested in sha rks are therecreation alfish erm en ,but thecontinu al fishing of sha rks has also led to theirdecline. Howe ver ,in recent years in some countriesrecreation alfishin ghas been revise d with the implementati on of tag and release program s. These prog rams are becoming more common , killing few er sharks and potenti all y assisting in scientific research.
Recreational fishing of sharks might only con sist of a sma ll per centage of the total commercial elasmo bra nch fisheri es, but sha llowe r coastal area s in which recreati onal as opposed to commerci al fishing occurs, are assumed to have a more fragil e ecosyste m conce rning extrac tion ofthe shar k as the apex pred ator (Ande rso n, 2002). South Africa has long a histor y of spor tsha rkfishing.The eastcoast was and still is apopul ar area for spea rfis hing(Condon, 1971).
Recreati on al fishin g is a popular activity in man y countries includ ing the USA.The peak of regi stered sha rks caug ht by recreation al fishe rmen was reach ed in 1974-75 with 1,588,000 sharks in the Atlanti c Ocean and Gulf of Mexi co . Howe ver, catc hes have dec reased significantly ever since. But, sha rk fishing is still very popul ar mainl y due to its accessibility as di fferent shark spec ies can be caught practi cally everywhe re from the shore to open water area s (Stone et al., 1998).
& Celli er s, 2005). There are severa l examples of experie nce d divers being conce rned abo ut no vice diver s and thenegati ve effect theyhave on the natural marin e environ ment, throu gh for examp le sta nd ing on and breaking coral due to the lack of buoyan cy contro l.
High number of diver s regardl ess of their certifica tio n can also scare marine life and either disturb thei r natural feeding or othe r beh avioural patt erns, or at worst scare them awaytot all y fro m the area(Duffy,2002).
Diver conce rn for the state of the manne environme nt IS far from a new subject.
Vallintine (197 1, pp.41)describes humankind ' s use of the oceanas "a bott omlessrubbish dump". He also criticise d othe r diver s in places suc h as the Mediterr anean for help ing them sel ves to culturalartefacts as if itwas "a free antiq uesuper ma rke t". Dive tourists are said to be willing to pay more for a dive expe rie nce in pristin e and attractive env iro nme nts, espec ia lly if the dive site is within a protected area (Dav is & Tisdell ,
1995 ).
3.5.1.Nature conservation and the marineen vironm ent
Nature conse rvatio n is in general cond ucted in a very utilitarian mann er, based on the value of nature as a resource for human use . The IUCN (1980, pp.8) sta tes that the man agemen t ofthe human use of natu re is necessar y in orde r to ens ure susta ina bility, so theseresources can be availab lefor future gene ratio ns as wellas the present,not only for the purpose of protec ting nature in itsel f. Con servati on is seen as positi ve as it is ben e ficial to human s over time and gene rations. But, how sho uld the spec ies which are not of direct use to the human populati on be man aged?Oppos ing the utilitarian view of natur e as a set of resources is the view tha t nature is a value in itsel f (intrinsic righ t to exist) and tha t we as the dominan t spec ies on Earth have an immen se respons ibility toward s allother life and spec ies.This poin t ofenv iron menta lview links to wha t is called deep ecology . Ho we ver, deep ecology is seen by man y as an impossible envi ron me ntal philosophy as much of the most severe nature degradati on takes place in poor er communities where nature is needed as a resource for human s in order to just surv ive (Jackso n, 1992).
Reasoningfor conservation can in man y situations be a complica ted task. Compromi sin g bet ween differin g opinio ns in order to achieve a solution is often needed. Additionall y collabor ation bet ween very differ ent user group s for the purpose ofincreased knowled ge and aware ness of a particul ar subject is ofte n needed in orde r to enhance the possibilities for natur e conser vati on in an area (Stebbins, 1992). Ther e is really no compensa tion for extinction of spec ies and neith er is it easy to predi ct that the lack of some sort of conservation might lead to this outco me. Itis not easyto argue for something that might just happ en in the future,due maybe to some sort of short-term project or relati vely low scale action at present , but with potenti al negati ve impacts which might just be visible man y years from now. Acti on s generating econo mic ben efits tom orrow might have the oppos ite impac t furtherinto the future, but man y of these cases are very difficult to argue for or prove (Stebbins, 1992 ).
Increasing globa lconce rn for loss of biodi versit y has grown over the past two decades thus leadin g to the realisation for greater conse rvatio n practi ces. Terr estri al and marine enviro nme nts require differen t conse rva tion man agem ent strateg ies. Both enviro nments are experiencing different ranges ofdegr adati on as adirect impact from human use.The need for sustaina ble managem ent ofthe marin e andcoasta lenviro nments is increasin gly intern ation all y recogni sed , but is not easily achieved as the knowled ge of the oceanic enviro nment is limited incompar iso n to the terr estri al enviro nment. Marin e conse rva tion stra teg ies need to be identi fied on an intern ati on al level , but the direct actions and implem entations to protect the environments sho uld to take place on a local le vel dep endin g onanarea's featu res and spec ificneeds (T horne -M iller & Caten a, 1991).
The protecti on of ecosyste ms and their spec ies dep end on the action and attitudes of human s, and the willing ness to agree with the fact that everyt hing on Earth is inter conn ected.A very sma ll area (around 3%) of Earth is protected, and these areas are oftensma ll,fragmented and isolated from each other, surro unded bynon -prot ected areas. This fact is espec ia lly probl em ati c for mar ine natur e reser ves, as these are not fence d in and not easy to mon itor. The future of man y aquat ic spec ies might depend on preser vati on and the protecti on ofareas and spec ies (Moyle & Leid y,1992).
Natural are a managem ent is a complex task involvin g a rang e of various stake ho lde rs fro m man aging authorities to local user gro ups. Sustainable managem ent aims and objectives for the natural areas need s con sensu s amo ng all stake ho lde rs and interested parti es, ens uring both a spec tru m of user opportunities and minimisin g negati ve environmenta l impacts .It is imperati vetorealise thatthe man agement ofa natural area is more abo ut managin g and contro lling the human use of this are a and its resources. (Barrieetal.,1998).
Some of the most commo n conservatio n managem ent stra teg ies are the esta blish ment of marine protected areas and regul ati on of specific spec ies (T horne -Miller & Caten a, 1991 ). South Africa's coastal zone is relati vel y unspoilt. Howe ver , human usage of natural resources is gen er ally increasin g and appro pria te man agem ent strategies need to be implem en ted in orde r to rever se existing degradation and avoid future negati ve impacts on the marin e env iro nment. The decl arati on of marin e protected areas (M PAs) can support susta ina ble marine man agem en t and conservation, but unfortunatel y man y MPAs are not prop erl y man ag ed and the decl aration itself does not directl y ben efit the marine env ironment. MPAs need to be produ ctively and effec tive ly man aged in orde r to be successful(Robinso n & Graa ff, 1994 ).
Loss of biodi versit y in aq uatic systems has mainl y been focusse d on fresh water ecosyste ms, rivers and estuaries where the high est diversity of spec ies is belie ved to be foun d . Howe ver , loss of aq uatic biodi versit y is sprea ding seawards, and espec ially the sha llowercoasta lareas are of concern.The ocean has for lon gbeen con sidered as a waste sink,and the pressure is incre asin g witha growing popul ation and further de velopment of coasta lareas(Moy le& Leid y, 1992).
Biod iver sit yis often used as akeyforcon ser vation ,but it is import ant to realisethatthis criterio n must be evaluated togeth er with other measur es. Cor al reefs, for example, are very diver se, while sea grass beds and man gro ves would have a low score on the diversit y rankin gs, yet are imper ati ve for certa in ecosyste ms and associated anima ls to surv ive. Ano the r vita l issu e is the over-ex p loitation ofcertain spec ies potenti ally lead ing
to local extinct ion of vulne rable spec ies. In these specific cases the challenge is to investig ate why the over-ex ploitatio n is happ ening and to relate the appro priate appro aches to solve the probl em. Marine prot ected areas can be a tool for add ress ing issu es such as marin e ecosyste m degrad ati on and threaten ed spec ies (Robinson,1995).
There is a gen er al lack of scientific evide nce evalua ting the dec reases in marine fish populations,but in several areas commercial fish eri es are noticing declines in catches to the point wher e the industry almos tsto ps being econo mically viabl e.Over-fi shing ofone species might affec t a who le ecosyste m, but little is known as to actually how.There are man y uncert ainti es conce rn ing glob al , regi on al and loc al fish stoc ks, but one aspect is fairl y clear; the biggest threat to marine biodiver sity is human s, our activities and populati on growth (Moyle & Leidy, 1992). There is an increasing conce rn about both recre ati on al and comme rc ia lshar k fishin g and its potential effects on marine food webs (Mauire and Gruber , 1990 in Moyle &Leid y, 199 2).