Op-ed: Marine protected areas in British Columbia only good for bragging rights
Renowned fisheries expert Ray Hilborn, holding a doctorate from the University of British Columbia and currently a professor at the University of Washington, is esteemed in the field. With numerous accolades and over 300 papers in scientific journals, Hilborn's expertise is widely recognized. In British Columbia, marine fisheries not only provide seafood but also support employment and coastal communities. However, the industry faces criticism and demands for action despite its contributions. Hilborn highlights these complexities in the ongoing discourse surrounding British Columbia's fisheries.
•
•
Do not index
Do not index
Drawing from experiences in California, Hilborn questions the efficacy of extensive MPA networks, highlighting disappointing outcomes and substantial costs. Instead, he advocates for directing resources towards addressing genuine threats to marine ecosystems, such as climate change and pollution, rather than pursuing ineffective MPA initiatives.
He emphasizes that bottom trawling, which primarily targets muddy and sandy bottoms, does not have the extensive detrimental impact often suggested. Moreover, Hilborn underscores the stringent regulations governing commercial fishing in B.C., ensuring sustainable harvest levels. Despite declines in salmon and herring populations, the proposed MPAs are unlikely to address these issues effectively, as they are not being directly fished.
In response to Daniel Pauly's proposal in the Vancouver Sun for immediate action to close large areas of the British Columbia (B.C.) coast to fishing through the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs), Ray Hilborn highlights key misconceptions. Hilborn challenges the assumptions that bottom trawling is significantly damaging ocean bottoms and reducing productivity, as well as the notion of overfishing threatening B.C. marine fisheries.