Marine protected areas in Cuba

Transcription

1 Bull Mar Sci. 94(2): research paper Marine protected areas in Cuba 1 Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, 18A No. 4114, Miramar, Playa, Havana, Cuba Current address: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Av. Liga Periférico-Insurgentes Sur 4903, Parques del Pedregal, Mexico City, Mexico. 3 Parque Nacional Guanahacabibes, La Bajada, Sandino, Pinar del Río, Cuba Acuario Nacional de Cuba, 3ra y 62, Miramar, Playa, Havana, Cuba Instituto de Oceanología 186 No , Miramar, Playa. Havana, Cuba Centro de Investigaciones de Ecosistemas Costeros, Cayo Coco, Morón, Ciego de Avila, Cuba Parque Nacional Cayos de San Felipe, La Coloma, Pinar del Río, Cuba * Corresponding author <susana.perera@gmail.com>. k Marine Ecology and Conservation in Cuba Guest Editors: Joe Roman, Patricia González-Díaz Date Submitted: 6 March, Date Accepted: 14 August, Available Online: 3 October, Susana Perera Valderrama 1, 2 * Aylem Hernández Ávila 1 Juliett González Méndez 1 Orestes Moreno Martínez 1 Dorka Cobián Rojas 3 Hakna Ferro Azcona 1 Elvis Milián Hernández 1 Hansel Caballero Aragón 4 Pedro M Alcolado 5 Fabián Pina-Amargós 6 Zaimiuri Hernández González 7 Leonardo Espinosa Pantoja 7 Lázaro Francisco Rodríguez Farrat 1 ABSTRACT. Cuba has recognized that conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity is a priority. One of the main strategies it has developed is the creation of the National System of Protected Areas (Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, or SNAP), which includes an important marine component. Here, we present the current status of the Cuban marine protected areas (MPAs) and their challenges and prognoses. To date, 105 MPAs have been proposed; they cover 25% of the Cuban insular shelf. Of these, 57 have been legally incorporated into the system and 13 more are being managed to its standards, a total of 70 have some degree of implementation. About 30% of the Cuban coral reefs, 24% of the seagrass beds, and 35% of mangroves are legally protected by SNAP. The main challenges are insufficient financing and the difficulty of reinvesting profits generated within these areas. Prohibited fishing practices and capture of protected species are the principle issues that affect MPAs. The priorities for the immediate future are to assess the value of ecosystem services, strengthen connections with fishing communities, and achieve greater integration with other sectors to guarantee the proper management of tourism and fisheries in and near MPAs for the benefit of sustainable development. Bulletin of Marine Science 2018 Rosenstiel School of Marine & Atmospheric Science of the University of Miami 423

2 424 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Marine protected areas (MPAs) are one of the primary tools for conserving marine biodiversity and using it sustainably (Edgar et al. 2007, Charles et al. 2016). Case studies suggest that these areas can be used to manage fisheries (Pina Amargós et al. 2014, Yamazaki et al. 2015) and maintain coral cover (Selig and Bruno 2010, Howarth et al. 2015). Some scientists also emphasize that the environmental services provided by coastal marine ecosystems are positively affected by MPAs (Potts et al. 2014, Leenhardt et al. 2015). At the same time, these areas can provide reference sites to evaluate threats to biodiversity, and they can improve engagement and education of local communities (Lundquist and Granek 2005). The importance of creating MPAs and including them in systems of protected areas has been recognized throughout the world. By 1970, 118 MPAs had been established in 27 nations (Kelleher and Kenchington 1992). According to the Marine Conservation Institute (2016), at present more than 13,600 MPAs have been designated globally, with over 500 in the Caribbean. However, despite increasing numbers, MPAs represent <3% of the world s marine area (Marine Conservation Institute 2016). Cuba, the largest island in the Caribbean Sea, has the highest marine biodiversity in the region (Miloslavich et al. 2010). Coral reefs surround 95% of its insular shelf (Hernández-Zanuy and Alcolado 2010). Its long coastline contributes to the connectivity of marine populations in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico (Paris et al. 2005). Nevertheless, as throughout the Caribbean region, Cuban marine biodiversity is seriously threatened (Creary et al. 2008). The Cuban government has recognized conservation and sustainable use of its natural resources as a priority (González- Díaz 2015). One of the main strategies developed to guarantee their preservation was the creation of a National System of Protected Areas (SNAP; Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas de Cuba in Spanish) with an important marine component (National Center of Protected Areas, CNAP 2013). Here, we present the history, current status, challenges, and projections for the future of Cuban MPAs. We have compiled this information from documents that relate to implementation of the SNAP. Most of the data have been extracted from SNAP plans that have already been completed (CNAP 2002, 2009) or are undergoing implementation (CNAP 2013). Reports and publications from projects undertaken by the CNAP and other institutions have also been reviewed. History of Cuban MPAs The first proposals for protected areas date from 1968 and 1973; they were prepared by Kenton Miller, an FAO consultant (Miller 1984), and researchers of the Botanical Institute and the Flora and Fauna Commission of the Cuban Academy of Sciences. These proposals focused mainly on terrestrial environments, although mangroves, lagoons, and some other coastal ecosystems were included. The First National Protected Areas Workshop was conducted in 1989; it had a multi-organizational approach involving experts from several national and provincial institutions. The opening discussions on the topic of MPAs took place during this meeting, although terrestrial and coastal components were the main focus of the proposals (Estrada et al. 2004). In the Second National Protected Areas Workshop, held in 1995, 535 proposed areas were analyzed, and MPAs were formally recognized

3 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 425 (CNAP 2002). Many of the areas included in the current SNAP date from this meeting (CNAP 2013). The Institute of Oceanology (now called ICIMAR ) provided considerable information on marine species and ecosystems and proposed 18 marine reserves (including no-take zones) to ensure the sustainable management of Cuban fishery resources (Instituto de Oceanología 1995). Currently, 15 of these areas are included in the SNAP (CNAP 2013). At that time, the Ministry of the Fishing Industry also began the process of declaring Zones under Special Regimes of Use and Protection. The proposed sites were Jardines de la Reina, Punta Francés, Ciénaga de Zapata, and Cayo Largo, areas that would later mostly overlap with MPAs (Estrada et al. 2004). After the 1995 workshop, the limited representation of marine areas in the SNAP was acknowledged. To address this problem, the recently created National Center for Protected Areas (Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, or CNAP) initiated a marine planning process that continued in the Third National Protected Areas Workshop (1998). Most of the marine areas of SNAP were included in this last planning phase (Estrada et al. 2004). At present, eight national and international courses for MPA managers on planning and management of MPAs have taken place in Cuba (CNAP 2013). In addition, three planning sessions to update SNAP have been held every 5 yrs, including three gap analyses. These planning processes have largely validated the existing MPAs and the new proposals, and they have demonstrated the importance of using ecoregional planning, geographic information systems, remote sensing, digital cartography, and decision-support systems in the design and management of Cuban MPAs (CNAP 2013). Current Status of Cuban MPAs Cuba has proposed 211 conservation areas for protection, including 105 MPAs (Fig. 1) (CNAP 2013). Fifty-seven of the proposed areas have been approved, and seven are currently in the approval process. Figure 2 shows the evolution of MPAs in terms of official approval and the area (in hectares) they cover. Approved MPAs protect >2.5 million hectares of marine and coastal territories in the 15 provinces of Cuba and the special municipality of Isla de la Juventud. Individual MPAs and their locations can be found at online (available at The proposed system of protected areas covers 25% of the Cuban insular shelf, with 19 percent of this marine area approved to date. About 30% of Cuban coral reefs, 24% of seagrass beds, and 35% of mangroves are protected in the SNAP (CNAP 2013). Of the 21 spawning sites of commercially important fish species identified by Claro and Lindeman (2003), 13 (62%) have protected area status. Cuba defines an MPA as a marine or coastal portion of the national territory of outstanding natural value devoted to the protection and maintenance of biodiversity, natural resources, and cultural values associated with the natural environment (CNAP 2013). These areas include marine ecosystems or a combination of marine and coastal ecosystems. Cuban MPAs have been chosen for their high conservation value and the presence of important marine species such as snappers, groupers, sharks (see Box 1), spiny lobsters, mangroves, marine turtles, and corals, inlcuding the genera Acropora spp., Orbicella spp., and Agaricia spp. They have also been chosen because they are adjacent to terrestrial natural areas and would contribute to the regional protection of terrestrial and marine resources.

4 426 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Figure 1. Cuban marine protected areas (MPAs). Included are all of the MPAs of the eight management categories, but only the names of the marine national parks are presented.

5 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 427 Figure 2. Figure 2. Number of marine protected areas established in Cuba (gray bars) and total hectares covered (black line) from 2001 to Cuba has adopted the management categories of protected areas established by the IUCN, adapting them to the country. Eight such categories have been established (Comité Ejecutivo del Consejo de Ministros 1999). 1. Nature Reserve (Ia IUCN) 2. National Park (II IUCN) 3. Ecological Reserve (II IUCN) 4. Natural Outstanding (III IUCN) 5. Floristic Managed Reserve (IV IUCN) 6. Faunal Refuge (IV IUCN) 7. Protected Natural (V IUCN) 8. Protected Area with Managed Resources (VI IUCN) Cuban MPAs are also classified according to national significance (n = 46) and local significance (n = 59). Marine protected areas are considered to be of international, national, or regional importance; they constitute the core of the SNAP because of their conservation value, representativeness, degree of conservation, uniqueness, and size (CNAP 2002). The MPAs of national significance are headed by the nine national parks (Table 1, Fig. 1). The remaining MPAs include areas of both national and local significance: 1 nature reserve, 15 ecological reserves, 11 natural outstanding landscapes, 11 floristic managed reserves, 37 faunal refuges, 11 protected natural landscapes, and 10 protected areas with managed resources (Table 1). A management coordination structure with three levels (national, provincial, and local) ensures the implementation of MPAs. The National Coordinating Board, chaired by CNAP, includes the main stakeholders of SNAP under the National Enterprise for Protection of Flora and Fauna (Empresa Nacional para la Protección de la Flora y la Fauna, or ENPFF), the Department of Fishing Regulations, the National Office of State Inspection of the Ministry of Food (formerly the National Office of Fishing Inspection), the Forest Ranger Corporation, and other departments. A coordinating board at the provincial level incorporates stakeholders and departments from the provinces. Administration of MPAs at the local level is guaranteed by the management authorities. Seventy-three of the 106 proposed MPAs currently

6 428 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Table 1. Cuban marine protected areas. Management authority abbreviations are: CITMA = Ministry of Science, Technologyand Environment, ENPFF = National Enterprise for Protection of Flora and Fauna, JA = Board of Directors, NP = No management authority, CAP = Council of the Provincial Administration, GEBH = State Working Group for Integrated Environmental Management and Sustainable Development of Havana Bay, MINAL = Ministry of Food Industry, EFI = Integral Forestry Enterprise. Name Province Significance Management category Status Management authority Terrestrial Guanahacabibes Pinar del Río National National Park Approved CITMA 23, , , Cayos de San Felipe Pinar del Río National National Park Approved ENPFF 2, , , Los Pretiles Pinar del Río National Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 2, , , Banco San Antonio Pinar del Río National Natural Outstanding Península de Guanahacabibes Pinar del Río National Protected Area with Managed Resources Marine Total Approved JA , , Approved JA 77, , , Humedal Sur de los Palacios Pinar del Río Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 13, , , Cayo Levisa - Corona de San Carlos Pinar del Río Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP , , Punta Caribe Pinar del Río Local Faunal Refuge Identified ENPFF 1, , San Ubaldo-Sabanalamar Pinar del Río Local Floristic Managed Reserve Approved ENPFF 5, , Cayos Las Cayamas - Los Guzmanes Artemisa Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 2, , , Abra del Rio Cojímar La Habana Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified CAP Ensenada de Portier - Lamas La Habana Local Protected Natural Valle del río Tarara La Habana Local Protected Natural Ensenada de Tiscornia La Habana Local Protected Natural Rincón de Guanabo La Habana Local Protected Natural Laguna del Cobre - Itabo La Habana Local Protected Natural Identified NP Identified NP Identified GEBH Approved CAP Approved CAP Golfo de Batabanó Mayabeque Local Faunal Refuge Identified ENPFF 1, , , Sureste de El Inglés Mayabeque Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 10, , Boca de Canasí Mayabeque Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified ENPFF Ciénaga de Zapata Matanzas National National Park Approved ENPFF 281, , , Cayo Mono-Galindo Matanzas Local Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 3, , , Sistema Espeleolacustre de Zapata Matanzas National Natural Outstanding Approved ENPFF 9, , ,661.00

7 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 429 Table 1. Continued. Management authority Terrestrial Name Province Significance Management category Status Approved JA 213, , , Península de Zapata Matanzas National Protected Area with Managed Resources Bacunayagua Matanzas - Mayabeque Local Ecological Reserve Approved Tourism - Cubanacán Marine Total Cayos de las Cinco Leguas Matanzas Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 3, , Laguna de Maya Matanzas Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF Varahicacos Matanzas Local Protected Natural Approved CITMA Valle del Río Canimar Matanzas Local Protected Natural Approved ENPFF Ensenada de Rancho Luna Cienfuegos Local Natural Outstanding Identified NP Guanaroca - Punta Gavilán Cienfuegos Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 1, , , Identified NP 2, , Guajimico Cienfuegos Local Protected Natural Los Caimanes Villa Clara National National Park Approved CITMA- MINAL Ojo del Mégano Villa Clara National Natural Outstanding Cayo Francés Villa Clara National Faunal Refuge Identified Tourism Group Gaviota SA , , Approved ENPFF Lanzanillo - Pajonal - Fragoso Villa Clara National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 10, , , Las Picúas - Cayo Cristo Villa Clara National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 15, , , Cayo Santa María Villa Clara National Faunal Refuge Approved Tourism Group Gaviota SA Las Loras Villa Clara Local Faunal Refuge Approved Tourism Group Gaviota SA 5, , , , , , Caguanes Sancti Spiritus National National Park Approved CITMA 8, , , Approved JA 63, , , Buenavista Sancti Spiritus - Villa Clara - Ciego de Ávila National Protected Area with Managed Resources Delta del Agabama Sancti Spiritus Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 5, , , Delta del Higuanojo Sancti Spiritus Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP

8 430 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Table 1. Continued. Name Province Significance Management category Status Management authority Terrestrial Tunas de Zaza Sancti Spiritus Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 5, , Centro y Oeste de Cayo Coco Ciego de Avila National Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 17, , , Cayos de Ana María Ciego de Avila National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF , , Humedales del Norte de Ciego de Avila Ciego de Avila National Protected Area with Managed Resources Dunas de Playa Pilar Ciego de Avila Local Natural Outstanding Marine Total Identified NP 63, , , In process ENPFF Buchillones - Punta Alegre Ciego de Avila Local Natural Outstanding Identified NP 1, , Loma de Santa María Ciego de Avila Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 13, , National National Park Approved ENPFF 16, , , Jardines de la Reina Camagüey - Ciego de Ávila Maternillos -Tortuguilla Camagüey Local Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 3, , , Correa Camagüey Local Faunal Refuge In process ENPFF 7, , , Río Máximo Camagüey National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 8, , , Humedales de Cayo Romano Camagüey National Protected Area with Managed Resources Cayos Los Ballenatos y manglares de la bahía de Nuevitas Approved ENPFF 99, , , Camagüey Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 6, , Cayo Cruz Camagüey Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 1, , , Macurije-Santa Maria Camagüey Local Faunal Refuge In process ENPFF 21, , , Laguna Larga Camagüey Local Floristic Managed Reserve In process ENPFF 11, , Cayo Guajaba Camagüey Local Protected Area with Managed Resources Cayo Sabinal Camagüey Local Protected Area with Managed Resources Bahía de Nuevas Grandes - La Isleta Las Tunas - Camagüey In process ENPFF 17, , Approved ENPFF 11, , National Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 4, , , Bahía de Malagueta Las Tunas Local Faunal Refuge Identified ENPFF 14, , , Ojo de Agua Las Tunas National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 1, , Cayo Rabihorcado Las Tunas Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP

9 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 431 Table 1. Continued. Name Province Significance Management category Status Management authority Terrestrial San Miguel del Junco Las Tunas Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 5, , Las Nuevas Las Tunas Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 4, , Caletones Holguín National Ecological Reserve In process EFI 6, , Loma de Miraflores Holguín National Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 2, , Bahía de Tánamo y cayos Holguín Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 2, , , Balsas de Gibara Holguín Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP Boca de Cananova Holguín Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP Delta del Mayari Holguín Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP 2, , Cabo Lucrecia - Punta de Mulas Holguín Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 2, , Península de Ramón Holguín Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 1, , Bahía de Naranjo Holguín Local Protected Natural Marine Total Identified NP , Desembarco del Granma Granma National National Park Approved ENPFF 26, , , Identified ENPFF 1, , , Banco de Buena Esperanza - Managuano Delta del Cauto Granma - Las Tunas Granma National Natural Outstanding National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 53, , , El Macío Granma Local Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 1, , , Granma Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 1, , , Ensenada del Gua y Cayos de Manzanillo El Retiro Santiago de Cuba National Nature Reserve Approved CITMA 1, , Siboney - Juticí Santiago de Cuba National Ecological Reserve Approved CITMA , San Miguel de Parada Santiago de Cuba Local Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF Reserva de Biosfera Baconao Santiago de Cuba - Guantánamo National Protected Area with Managed Resources Estrella - Aguadores Santiago de Cuba Local Protected Natural Alejandro de Humboldt Guantánamo - Holguín Approved JA 70, , Approved ENPFF National National Park Approved CITMA 68, , , Hatibonico Guantánamo National Ecological Reserve Approved CITMA 5, ,274.00

10 432 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Table 1. Continued. Management authority Terrestrial Name Province Significance Management category Status Baitiquirí Guantánamo National Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 2, , , Identified ENPFF 7, , , Maisi - Caleta Guantánamo Local Natural Outstanding Esparto Guantánamo Local Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 2, , Approved JA 116, , , Cuchillas del Toa Guantánamo - Holguín National Protected Area with Managed Resources Tacre Guantánamo National Ecological Reserve Identified NP 2, , Approved ENPFF Cañon del Yumurí Guantánamo Local Natural Outstanding Yara - Majayara Guantánamo Local Natural Outstanding Paso de los Alemanes Guantánamo Local Natural Outstanding Marine Total Approved CITMA 1, , Identified NP Macambo Guantánamo National Floristic Managed Reserve Identified NP 2, , Identified NP 5, , Maisí - Yumurí Guantánamo National Protected Natural Punta Francés Isla de la Juventud Cayo Largo Isla de la Juventud Los Indios Isla de la Juventud Punta del Este Isla de la Juventud Cayo Campos - Cayo Rosario Isla de la Juventud Ciénaga de Lanier Isla de la Juventud Sur de la Isla de la Juventud Isla de la Juventud Cayos Los Indios Isla de la Juventud National National Park Approved ENPFF 1, , , National Ecological Reserve Identified NP 3, , , National Ecological Reserve Approved ENPFF 5, , National Ecological Reserve Identified ENPFF 8, , , National Faunal Refuge Approved ENPFF 10, , , National Faunal Refuge In process ENPFF 16, , , National Protected Area with Managed Resources Approved ENPFF 73, , , Local Faunal Refuge Identified NP , ,977.41

11 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 433 have management plans in place that include staff, budget allocation, and office infrastructure (Table 1). The ENPFF is the principle management authority in Cuba, with 50 MPAs under its jurisdiction. The Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment (CITMA) manages eight MPAs. Other authorities include the State Working Group for Integrated Environmental Management and Sustainable Development of Havana Bay, the Council of the Provincial Administration, the tourism group Gaviota S.A., and the Board of Directors (Table 1). The Board of Directors represents a group of several institutions that co-manage an MPA. In general, it administers large MPAs such as those in the category of Protected Areas with Managed Resources. Legal Framework Laws, decrees, resolutions, and technical standards apply to both marine and terrestrial Cuban protected areas. The main legal provisions concerning the management of MPAs include: Law 81 (1997), established the Ministry of Science, Technology, and the Environment (CITMA in Spanish) as responsible for directing activities related to SNAP. Decree Law 200 (1999), defined acts or behaviors that are contraventions of the protection of the environment and protected areas. Decree Law 201 (1999), established the legal administration of the SNAP. Resolution 17 (1999), created the National Center of Protected Areas (CNAP). Under these guidelines, 18 MPAs were approved in 2001, 3 more in 2008, 20 in 2010, and 16 in 2012 through agreements issued by the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers and published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Cuba. Box 1 The Goliath Grouper, Sharks, and Marine Protected Areas Large marine species, such as the Atlantic goliath grouper [Epinephelus itajara (Lichstenstein, 1822)] and sharks, are important for the ecology, economy, and conservation of Caribbean biodiversity, but they have been inadequately studied in Cuban waters. The goliath grouper is one of the largest fishes on Earth; it reaches 2.5 m in length, weighs up to 450 kg, and is critically endangered throughout its range. Yet it is not protected in Cuban waters. More than a decade ago, four goliath groupers were tagged in Jardines de la Reina National Park. They were all caught by commercial fishers less than three years later outside the protected areas, an indication of heavy fishing pressure (Pina Amargós and Gonzales 2009). In 2013, scientists detected the first spawning aggregation site for this species in Cuba, located outside Jardines de la Reina National Park (Pina-Amargós et al. unpub data). Goliath groupers are more abundant inside the park than outside, but their concentration is very low, probably due to fishing at the spawning site(s). Although the goliath grouper does not constitute an important fishery in Cuba, they are caught commercially during the spawning season and for subsistence year-round. The only regulation is a minimum size limit of 960 g. More than 20 years ago, fishing for groupers generally took place in shallower waters, which probably indicates the impact of fishing in species depth distribution. Many shark species are also threatened. Sharks are times more abundant inside Jardines de la Reina National Park than outside (Pina- Amargós et al. unpub data). Taking into account the recapture rate outside the protected area, the National Park offers better protection for the lemon shark [Negaprion brevirostris (Poey, 1868)] and Caribbean reef shark [Carcharhinus perezii (Poey, 1876)] than for the nurse shark [Ginglymostoma cirratum (Bonnaterre, 1788)] and blacktip shark [Carcharhinus limbatus (Müller and Henle, 1839)]. Seventy-seven percent of recaptured tagged sharks have been taken outside Jardines de la Reina National Park, mostly by fishermen, an indication of heavy fishing outside the protected areas (Pina- Amargós et al. unpub data). Goliath grouper and sharks are the main scuba-diving attractions in Jardines de la Reina (Figueredo et al. 2010). These megafauna have helped to define the first National Action Plan for the Conservation of Sharks and Rays in Cuba. Several new management actions are required for these species: a total ban on harvesting endangered species, protection of spawning aggregation sites, modification of fisheries regulations, implementation of fishing-gear restrictions, establishment of catch quotas, and a requirement that landings be recorded by species. To help the fishing community move beyond commercial harvest, alternative livelihoods, such as tourism and scuba diving, should be promoted. Essential research includes studies of the dynamics of spawning aggregation sites and movement patterns.

12 434 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Figure 3. Marine protected areas in Cuba protect a wide diversity of species. In Guanahacabibes National Park, these include (A) the staghorn coral, Acropora cervicornis, and (B) the sponge Callyspongia vaginalis. Jardines de la Reina National Park protects (C) the goliath grouper, Epinepheluss itajara, and (D) the reef shark, Carcharinus perezi. Photos courtesy of C Contreras Koob (Guanahacabibes) and N López Fernández (Jardines). Notable Marine Protected Areas of Cuba Several MPAs are worth emphasizing because of their history and high profile. The Guanahacabibes National Park, in the Pinar del Rio province (Fig. 3), is of high ecological value because of its healthy coral reefs (Caballero-Aragón et al. 2007, PereraValderrama et al. 2016). In November 2015, an agreement between the United States and Cuba created a sisterhood between the Guanahacabibes National Park and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary the first memorandum of understanding between the two countries concerning environmental conservation. Cayos de San Felipe National Park in the Pinar del Rio province has important sea turtle nesting populations, including the critically endangered hawksbill turtle [Eretmochelys imbricata (Linnaeus, 1766)] (Espinosa-Pantoja et al. 2014). It also has the second largest colony of Least Terns (Sternula antillarum Lesson, 1847) in the West Indies (Hernández-González et al. 2016). Zapata Peninsula is considered the most important wetland in Cuba and the insular Caribbean region. The area contains some of the best-preserved reefs in the country, including the reef crest of Faro Cazones in Ciénaga de Zapata National Park, with >60% live coral cover (Caballero-Aragón et al. 2016), and the reefs of the Bahía de Cochinos, inside the Natural Outstanding Sistema Espeleolacustre de Zapata, with >35% live coral cover (Caballero-Aragón and Perera-Valderrama 2014). Jardines de la Reina National Park owes its significance to the existence of abundant populations of fish and invertebrates of commercial importance. The effectiveness of maintaining and increasing fish biomass in this national park has been

13 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 435 scientifically established (Pina Amargós et al. 2014). The largest biomass of fish of the families Serranidae and Lutjanidae in the Caribbean region is reported in this area (Hackerot et al. 2013). Punta Francés National Park in the Isla de la Juventud was one of the first MPAs. Preservation of its scenic reefs has been a priority. This park contains the oldest diving center in the country, and one of the most treasured areas for divers due to its beauty and preservation of coral reefs. Tourism in MPAs Given their natural, historical, and cultural value, Cuban MPAs have great potential for tourism. The SNAP works with the Ministry of Tourism (MINTUR) and with national and provincial groups concerned with ecotourism under the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers. After the legal approval of ecotourism groups, in 2013, new regulations were established to promote visits to protected areas. In addition, a new proposal for the management of nautical activities in MPAs is currently being developed. New regulations have also been developed for individual MPAs, such as the Guanahacabibes National Park, where zoning was adjusted to manage the arrival of boats and cruises. The development of tourism is a central strategy for the SNAP. Scuba diving is considered a key component for tourist visits to MPAs. Many of the most important diving centers of the island are in them, including María la Gorda in the Guanahacabibes National Park, El Colony on Isla de la Juventud, Playa Girón on the Bahía de Cochinos, and the Avalon Fleet on Jardines de la Reina. Catch-and-release sport fishing is also considered compatible with the management of Cuban MPAs and has been developed at Jardines de la Reina and Ciénaga de Zapata national parks and in Campos-Rosario Faunal Refuge. Future studies are needed to determine the effects of this recreational fishing on populations within the parks. Guidelines and methods have been developed to assure appropriate implementation of tourism in the MPAs. These include: the Strategic Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism Development in the SNAP of Cuba; sustainable tourist products (e.g., diving, trekking, fly fishing) for Jardines de la Reina National Park, Ciénaga de Zapata National Park, and Guanahacabibes National Park; strategic guidelines for sustainable tourism in the SNAP; and methods for monitoring visitation. The SNAP trains tour guides, travel agencies, MPA managers, and the private sector for these activities. Community Involvement In Cuba, it is estimated that in protected areas and buffer zones there are around 250,000 inhabitants, grouped in about 340 communities and settlements, and some isolated populations, mainly in mountainous, coastal, and wetland areas (ONE 2007). Although there is no specific study covering MPAs, most local communities associated with them are aware of the importance of various coastal and marine ecosystems, including mangroves, wetlands and coral reefs, for the development of diverse activities such as fisheries, tourism, agriculture and forestry (Ferro-Azcona et al. 2014). These activities allow improved living conditions in their communities, which is relevant, as several environmental problems are generated by the pressure their inhabitants apply toward natural resources. Recent research in marine and

14 436 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No coastal protected areas in southern Cuba has found that many natural coastal and marine ecosystems that are conserved at these sites constitute an important source of food and support for the economic and social development of their communities (Ferro-Azcona et al. 2014). For this reason, several actions have been implemented to guarantee community involvement in conservation, and to improve the welfare of people living in MPAs. Studies have been conducted to evaluate the services provided by marine and coastal ecosystems and to demonstrate the contribution they make to local economies within MPAs (Ferro-Azcona et al. 2014). Participatory workshops have been held with wide representation of community leaders, MPA managers, and productive sectors. Information has been gathered regarding the level of environmental awareness, understanding of environmental problems, use of natural resources, livelihoods, and conflicts (Ferro-Azcona et al. 2014). This information has been used in the participatory planning of MPAs, including the selection and implementation of economic alternatives. These alternatives accomplished in local communities include replacement of fishing gear, sponge aquaculture, sustainable fishing, beekeeping, sustainable agriculture, and the development of new ecotourism activities. Throughout the entire SNAP, strong environmental educational work is continuously carried out involving communities and main stakeholders associated with MPAs. Every year, festivals, competitions, fishing tournaments, and biodiversity monitoring campaigns are organized in local communities using volunteers. In addition, training sessions and workshops for dissemination of results are conducted with diving centers, fishing companies and forestry enterprises, among others. Fisheries Management in Cuban MPAs To reconcile fishery plans with conservation efforts, the Ministry of Food Industry (MINAL) proposed to overlap fishing reserves with MPAs. In the first stage, mapping of existing fishery reserves was updated to detect uncovered areas. Meetings and workshops were then conducted with fishermen and managers, which led to the declaration of new reserves within the MPAs. In other cases, negotiations are ongoing. Another successful example was the elimination of the bottom trawl net known as chinchorro. To eliminate this fishing gear item, used throughout almost all of the country, it was necessary to mitigate the social impact this would have. In workshops involving fishers, alternatives were evaluated and a joint strategy for acquisition of new fishing gear was developed. In August 2012, a resolution banning the use of the chinchorro was approved. With international support, raw materials for construction of equipment for some fishing enterprises and communities within MPAs were acquired. Fishers built their own gear (mainly longlines, gill nets, and traps), which they are now using. Cuban MPAs and International Policy The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has declared two Cuban MPAs as Natural World Heritage Sites. These are the national parks Desembarco del Granma (established in 1999) and Alejandro de Humboldt (established in 2001). In Alejandro de Humboldt, the terrestrial values are more relevant, but there is an important marine component. Desembarco del

15 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 437 Granma National Park has the second largest and best preserved system of marine terraces of the world. UNESCO, through the Man and the Biosphere scientific program, also established five biosphere reserves in Cuba with a marine component, including MPAs as the core areas. In 1987, the biosphere reserves Guanahacabibes Peninsula, at the western end of the island, and Cuchillas del Toa and Baconao, in the eastern region, were approved. In 2000, Península de Zapata and Buenavista were added. In 2001, the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance declared the first Cuban Ramsar site (wetland of international importance), Ciénaga de Zapata, considered the largest and best preserved wetland in the Insular Caribbean. In 2003, five more sites were established: Buenavista, Ciénaga de Lanier, Northern Wetland of Ciego de Ávila, Cauto s Delta and Rio Maximo. All sites are MPAs or include several of them within the Ramsar sites. The Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW) lists protected species and areas significant to the Caribbean region (CNAP 2013). In 2012, the Guanahacabibes National Park was included in the SPAW protected areas list. Currently, the status of Cayos de San Felipe National Park is being revised for inclusion in the list of protected areas under the SPAW Protocol. Challenges One of the principle challenges that MPA management faces in Cuba is insufficient funding, a reflection of the country s difficult economic situation. All MPAs have a specific budget, in local currency, guaranteed by the government. Depending on which management authority is involved, the MPAs receive their funding either through the National Fund for Forestry Development projects or through the annual budget of the ministries to which the managing authorities belong. International projects and tourism activities also attract funds to MPAs. The amounts are still insufficient, however, to ensure their proper management (CNAP 2013). Furthermore, revenues from tourism vary among MPAs, and most are not equitably distributed or reinvested in the protected areas once they are deposited in the centralized accounts. For these reasons, there are not yet enough legal and economic mechanisms to reinvest tourism profits generated by MPAs in the conservation of resources and management. With the intent of developing a nationwide income reinvestment strategy for protected areas, there have been numerous workshops, training sessions, and exchanges with other countries with experience in these areas, a process that has also involved the Ministry of Finance and Prices and the Ministry of Economy and Planning (CNAP 2013). As a result, a proposal presented to CITMA, and to the Parliamentary Commission on Services and the Parliamentary Commission on Environment and Energy suggested that one part of protected areas revenues should remain in the PAs, another should go to SNAP for redistribution among protected areas, and a third would go to the government s budget. For several reasons, this was not deemed feasible in the current economic climate. Some successes have been achieved in individual MPAs, mainly in areas of the ENPFF like the Natural Outstanding Sistema Espeleolacustre de Zapata. Since 2013, this protected area has received fees from tourists for access to dive sites, and these have resulted in annual revenues of nearly 20,000 Cuban convertible pesos (CUC$), not counting the profits of the tourism sector. However, there remains a

16 438 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No need to establish a national policy or financial mechanism so that such successes do not remain isolated cases, and that there be more consistency in MPA payments and the use of the revenues. Another major challenge is the increase in visitors to the MPAs. After the re-establishment of relations between Cuba and the United States, the visits of US citizens increased rapidly (Anfuso et al. 2017). According to the Ministry of Tourism, the US visitors to Cuba increased by 108% as of the end of April 2017 over 2016 (Felipe 2017). It follows that we can also expect a significant rise in the number of visits to MPAs. Such growth can present a major challenge to the health of species and ecosystems in these areas. Although the increase in American tourism specifically to visit MPAs is not yet known (see section on Tourism in MPAs), various efforts have been put in place to ensure planned and orderly visits to these vulnerable areas. Another serious concern about MPA management is the occurrence of illegal activities due to inadequate investment in control efforts. The use of prohibited fishing gear, the taking of protected species, and violations of minimum catch sizes occur both within and outside the MPA borders (CNAP 2013). The species most affected by illegal fishing are those of the highest commercial value, such as snappers and groupers. Although these species are the most exploited, in areas where their populations have declined, other groups of lower economic value are also being illegally fished in MPAs. One such case is the parrotfish, a group of species with low commercial value, but with very high ecological importance as an herbivore. By contrast, the spiny lobster [Panulirus argus (Latreille, 1804)], which has high commercial value and constitutes an important national export, is seriously pursued, and this affects the national economy. Marine turtles are also the subject of poaching. Although strong legislation bans the capture of many of these species and punishes offenders, enforcement is largely ineffective due to limited economic resources and capacity in the MPAs. Generally, the most geographically isolated MPAs are least affected by illegal fishing. However, these areas may be more vulnerable to exploitation due to greater enforcement limitations, while the incidence of illegalities may be underreported. In some areas, MPA personnel have been trained and certified to perform enforcement tasks, but there is substantial turnover of personnel due to the difficult working conditions. Accordingly, although many MPA workers have received training, some no longer perform these activities. In addition to surveillance conducted by MPA managers, efforts have been made to ensure enforcement by involving other stakeholders. The implementation of a Cooperative Surveillance System, for example, consists of key stakeholders being placed in charge of law enforcement. They include MPA managers, inspectors of the Ministry of the Food Industry and the Ministry of Agriculture, coast guard troops, and the Ministry of Armed Forces. Many surveillance activities have been conducted in the MPAs of several provinces by using this mechanism. Achievements and Future Projections Many improvements have been achieved in the design, planning, and management of MPAs in Cuba. Three SNAP plans have been implemented. The first plan, implemented between 2003 and 2008, laid the groundwork for the establishment and strengthening of the most significant protected areas, placing emphasis on terrestrial

17 Perera Valderrama et al.: Cuban MPAs 439 national parks. Its implementation had the support of the Global Environmental Facility/United Nations Development Program (GEF/UNDP) through the project Strengthening the National System of Protected Areas. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) gave support to individual MPAs such as Ciénaga de Zapata and Jardines de la Reina national parks and some of the Canarreos Archipelago. The second plan, implemented between 2009 and 2013, focused on MPAs through the support of the GEF/UNDP project, Southern Archipelagos of Cuba. This stage was characterized by strengthening cooperation with the Ministries of Tourism and Food Industries. The current implementation of the third plan (beginning in 2013, through 2020) has been undertaken with a SNAP of greater maturity. The actions today and in the immediate future are geared to assess the economic value of ecosystem services, to strengthen work with fishing communities, to achieve greater integration with the productive sectors, and to guarantee satisfactory management of tourism and fisheries in MPAs. Plans are also underway to improve the protection of marine ecosystems in the near future by increasing the size of MPAs to include a 3% additional cover of marine ecosystems on the Cuban insular shelf, and by increasing the size of MPAs to include a 3% additional cover of critical sites for marine species (fish spawning aggregation areas, turtles nesting beaches, etc.). This is to be achieved by establishing management authorities in the specific MPAs and, if possible, obtain their legal approval. Another success achieved by the SNAP has been the development of tools to plan and administrate MPAs: these include development of management plans, and of ways to assess both the management effectiveness and financial sustainability of protected areas. Methods have also been created to improve and categorize tourist activities. Scientific protocols to monitor species and ecosystems have been developed with the participation of scientists and managers. Each MPA that has been approved has a management plan with a 5-yr duration. Implementation is executed through annual operational plans. All these activities are designed to improve MPA management in the future. Compared to terrestrial protected areas, marine area protection is of more recent development. They require more resources and their implementation in Cuba has been difficult due to economic strictures and instability. However, despite these challenges, a strong political will has been maintained by the government. Although far from perfect, it has contributed to a great degree to ensure the conservation of Cuba s rich marine biodiversity, whose relevance to the Caribbean region and to the world is of substantial importance. Biodiversity conservation has been a priority in the readjustment of Cuba s economic model, which has been underway during the last 5 yrs. There has been increased collaborative work among government institutions, civil society, independent workers, and academia. The current plan is to continue to foster appropriate coordination among all parties involved or interested in the use of MPA resources, with emphasis on the work of the national and provincial coordinating boards. The purpose of this is to ensure effective enforcement and strengthen the legal and regulatory framework. Furthermore, MPA management has been strongly supported by many national and international institutions. Their support has contributed more than 30 million Cuban pesos per year through the National Fund for Forestry Development, as well as one million US dollars from such organizations as GEF/ UNDP, WWF, Cooperation for the Development of Emerging Countries (COSPE), Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), The Ocean Foundation, WILDCOAST, Ocean

18 440 Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol 94, No Doctor, Birdlife International, and United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), among others (CNAP 2013). To ensure optimal management, it will be essential to preserve these partnerships and establish new ones. To maintain these trends, we need to assure that conservation actions and awareness continue to prevail over the goals, actions, and limitations that corporate and financial interests seek to impose. Despite its economic needs, Cuba has implemented strong legislation for marine protection. The results and experiences of this work should support the movement ahead toward sustainability and conservation of natural resources. Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge C Perera, J Roman, D Greger, and G Allez for their assistance in editing the manuscript. The authors also thank N López Fernández, C Contreras Koob, and COSTASALVAJE A.C. for the photographs. Literature Cited Anfuso G, Williams AT, Martínez GC, Botero CM, Hernández JC, Pranzini E Evaluation of the scenic value of 100 beaches in Cuba: implications for coastal tourism management. Ocean Coast Manage. 142: Caballero-Aragón H, González-Ferrer S, Cobián D, Álvarez S, Alcolado-Prieto P Evaluación AGRRA del bentos en diez sitios de buceo de María la Gorda, Bahía de Corrientes, Cuba. Rev Invest Mar. 28: Caballero-Aragón H, Perera-Valderrama S Resultados del programa de arrecifes coralinos. Bentos. In: Hernández-Ávila A, editor. Estado actual de la biodiversidad marino-costera, en la región de los Archipiélagos del Sur de Cuba. Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Impresos Dominicanos. Caballero-Aragón H, Alcolado PM, Rey-Villiers N, Perera-Valderrama S, Méndez JG Coral communities condition in varying wave exposure: the gulf of Cazones, Cuba. Rev Biol Trop. 64: Charles A, Westlund L, Bartley DM, Fletcher WJ, Garcia S, Govan H, Sanders J Fishing livelihoods as key to marine protected areas: insights from the World Parks Congress. Aquat Conserv. 26: Claro R, Lindeman KC Spawning aggregation sites of snapper and grouper species (Lutjanidae and Serranidae) on the insular shelf of Cuba. Gulf Caribb Res. 14: CNAP (National Center of Protected Areas) Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, Cuba. Plan Sevilla, España. Escandón Imp. CNAP (National Center of Protected Areas) Plan del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (CD-ROM). La Habana, Cuba. CNAP (National Center of Protected Areas) Plan del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas La Habana, Cuba. Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. del Consejo de Ministros CE Decree Law 201 of the National System of Cuban Protected Areas. Gaceta Oficial de la República de Cuba. 84: Creary M, Alcolado P, Coelho V, Crabbe J, Green S, Geraldes F, Ainsley H, Hibbert H, Jones R, Jones-Smith L, et al Status of coral reefs in the northern Caribbean and western Atlantic GCRMN Node in In: Wilkinson C, editor. Status of coral reefs of the world. Townsville, Australia. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network and Reef and Rainforest Research Centre. Edgar GJ, Russ GR, Babcock RC Marine protected areas. In: Connell A, Gillanders BM, editors. Marine Ecology. Oxford University Press.