united nations environmental programme- mediterranean action plan

United Nations Environmental Programme- Mediterranean Action Plan

Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas

Management Plan for the ROSH HANIQRA–AKHZIV

Marine Reserve- Israel

Dr. Arturo López Ornat

M.S. Gemma Vilar (Public Use) Geogr. J.Enrique Frieyro (SIG)

PRELIMINARY Management Plan for the marine area of

Rosh HaNiqra – Akhziv Nature Reserve

FINAL PROPOSAL

30 Dec. 2004

Arturo López Gemma Vilar J.Enrique Frieyro PANGEA Consultores SL EGMASA

Preliminary Management Plan Rosh Hanikra-Akhziv Marine Reserve. Dec 04 - PANGEA-EGMASA

CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION AND METHODS II. CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

2.1. Natural values 2.2. Socioeconomic context and present uses 2.3. Conservation problems 2.4. Management weaknesses 2.5. SWOT analysis

III. OBJECTIVES AND CONSERVATION CATHEGORY 3.1. Reserve Objectives 3.2. Delimitation of the new Reserve 3.3. Conservation category and international status 3.4. Legal background 3.5. Objectives of the Management plan

IV. CONSERVATION PROPOSAL 4.1. Zoning principles 4.2. Zoning options 4.3. Protection measures and regulations 4.4. Management bodies and responsibilities

V. MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES 5.1. Administration and Surveillance 5.2. Conservation, Research, and Monitoring 5.3. Public Use and Education

ANNEXES: 1. Protected species in the Barcelona Convention 2. Examples of monitoring 3. Literature cited


I. INTRODUCTION and METHODS

1.1. Project framework This Project is framed in the Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas (MedMPA) Project executed by the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas (Rac/Spa, Tunis) of the United Nations Environmental Programme - Mediterranean Action Plan (UNEP-MAP) of the Barcelona Convention. Under financial support from the European Union, it belongs to the Project RAC-SPA / MedMPA 02/04 entitled « Elaboration and initiation of the Management Plan for the marine area of Rosh Haniqra, Israel ». The Project aims at proposing a preliminary Management Plan for the marine component of the Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv Marine Reserve. The present document is the final technical proposal prepared by the consultants of PANGEA and EGMASA, and was presented to both the Rac/Spa and the Israel Nature and Parks Authority in December 2004. 1.2. Methods A first draft was prepared on the basis of documents provided by the Israel Nature and Parks Authority (furtherly written with the achronim NPA in this document), by the Rac/Spa, and from our own field data obtained in a mission to the Rosh Haniqra area in northwestern Israel in October 14-20, 2004. The draft was circulated to the NPA which organized a Concertation Meeting to present and discuss the draft in Rosh Haniqra on November 28, 2004. This meeting included the main stakeholders, invited by NPA within those either interested or likely to be affected by the outputs of the Management Plan. To produce the first draft, the most relevant basic documentation obtained were recent studies -also developed under the framework of the MedMPA by Rac/Spa: the socioeconomic study by Becker et al (2004), the scientific report by Goren and Galil (2004) on fish and marine invertebrates, and the scientific report by Ramos et al (2004) on marine habitats, fish and other

marine conservation values. All these documents are still unpublished. The NPA also provided some photographs, brochures and general public diffusion materials. Related to cartography, the NPA facilitated us an aerial photo of the study area, including the boundaries of the existing protected areas, which allowed us to produce the basic cartographic layers for the GIS. Other information for the GIS was obtained from the scientific studies mentioned before, which used georeferenced sampling points, and from our own field mission and GPS points. We could not get documentation on the legal background sustaining the existing protected areas (either terrestrial or marine), as this material is only available in Hebrew, neither other copies of management plans from other existing protected areas, particularly marine, as the RHAMR would be the first case in the Mediterranean sea of Israel. Another drawback was that given the characteristics of the Project timeframe, we could not visit the area in the high summer season. During our first field mission, facilitated by the Project’s focal point in Israel, Dr. Reuven Ortal from NPA, we met 17 persons (6 from NPA, 4 scientists directly related to the marine reserve baseline studies, and 7 local representatives Matte Ashier municipality, city plenners, and local tourism associations and services. The present draft was presented for consultation with most of these stakeholders in Rosh Haniqra on Nov.28, 2004. 1.3. Present protected areas At present there are five protected sites in the area (see Maps 2 and 3).

I. Rosh Haniqra, a coastal formation of white calcareous cliffs featuring beaches and long underwater caves was declared a Nature Reserve in 1965 and a National Park in 1972, under the National Park, Nature Reserve and National Monuments Law of 1963. Its geomorphical values are unique in Israel. Even its total size is of just 462 ha (440 ha as a Nature


Reserve and 22 ha as the National Park), its importance is underlined by the 250,000 visitors a year, searching for recreation on its beaches, caves and impressive seascape. It was declared as a Specially Protected Area (SPA) under the Barcelona Convention in 1987. II. The Park is completed with islets at some 800 m from the coast, protected along with waters in a marine circle 100 m radius around each islet.

III. The Akhziv National Park, with archaeological (Phoenician, Crusade) important remnants and a highly visited recreational beach.

IV. Two Nature Reserves adding aprox. 25 ha were declared on the coastal strip protecting the turtle nesting beaches south and north of the Bezet beach.

V. A Marine area protecting fauna and flora, acting as a fisheries reserve, includes c.a. 4 Km along the coast and 1Km into the sea (aprox. 400 ha).

1.4. The new proposed marine reserve The Israel Nature and Parks Authority (NPA) seeks to enlarge existing protected areas into the marine environment conserving a coastal strip and marine area including the already existing but discontinuous Nature Reserves on the beach, and an existing marine reserve corridor, starting at the Lebanese border and south to include the Akhziv National Park, including the marine environments and the islests. Marine protected areas (MPAs) fulfill three functions in modern conservation (UNEP 1995): conserving marine biodiveristy, maintaining productivity, and contributing to economic and social welfare. Protected areas, specially marine, can not be seen in isolation from their socio-economic context, as conservation and development are increasingly linked. These areas should be planned and managed as an integral part of the wider resource use, public demand, institutional, economic and social systems. Such concepts also inspire the new Biodiversity Protocol, to the Barcelona Convention in which the State of Israel is a Contracting Party.

1.5. The Management Plan Following the provisions for a Specially Protected Area in the Barcelona Convention, the National Authorities shall adopt any measures deemed necessary for the planning, management, supervision and monitoring of the new Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv Marine Reserve (further named with the achronim RHAMR in this document), endowing the new Reserve with a Management Plan for its marine extension. The main objective of the Management Plan is to enable the RHAMR conserving its unique natural features while ensuring its visitors enjoyment and environmental awareness, avoiding any conflicts between users and nature resources, and complying with the most demanding international provisions on protected area management. The Management Plan will specify the legal and institutional framework and the management and protection measures applicable, and will try to reconcile any conflicting interests, fairly and evenly representing the stakeholder’s viewpoints.


II. CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS 2.1. Natural values This coastal marine area is largely the product of the accumulation of Nile-derived sandy sediments since the Pliocene. Goren and Galil (2004) describe the northern coast of Israel as “divided longitudinally by three parallel eolianite (known by their local name Kurkar) ridges. The submerged middle Kurkar ridge runs parallel to the beach at 4-6 m water depth, whereas the topographic troughs between the ridges are filled with alluvial soils, dark loams and clays (Almagor & Hall, 1980). This pattern is interrupted in two locations, Shiqmona and in Rosh HaNiqra, by cretaceous carbonate rocks”. The same authors sampled 18 sites in the RHARM, and together with other 35 sites sampled by Ramos et al (2004), this biological information has been introduced into a GIS, a synthesis of which is presented in Map1. They report 82 fish species (6 Erythrean 1), 179 mollusc species (19 Erythrean). Also 39 decapode (crustaceae) (4 Erythrean, but one of them Alpheus audouini accounting for 43 of the total 87 specimens sampled), 12 spp of Coelenterates and 15 spp of Foraminifera. The ecological importance of the Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv Marine Reserve (RHAMR) is underlined by 5-6 km of coastline with supra and infra-litoral zones with a variety of invertebrate and fish species, and large areas covered with biogenic constructions (vermetid rims of Dendropoma spp. and Maerl rodolite bottoms of Spondilus sp.). Together with presence of some rare fishes and invertebrates (see ahead) and breeding grounds for seabirds, the area also holds nesting grounds for the marine turtles Caretta caretta and the –very rare in the Mediterranean- Chelonia mydas.

1 Erythrean species, also called “Lessepian”, are marine invaders from the Red Sea across the Suez Canal (see ahead Section 2.2.)

All these natural assets (except Spondilus which is an Erythrean species) are included in the V Protocol to the Barcelona Convention as regionally protected. Actually, according to the first surveys (Goren and Galil 2004; Ramos et al 2004) the RHAMR holds 15 marine species included in Annex II of the BarCon Protocol (List of endangered of threatened species) and other 6 spp in Annex III (List of species whose exploitation is regulated) (see our Annex 1). Table 1 (Ramos et al 2004) displays the presence and abundance of these protected species against the main types of marine habitats which are presented in Map 1. According to these experts (com.pers.) some of the most characteristic marine assets in the RHAMR are the Kurkar ridge, the vermetid reefs of Dendropoma, the well represented “Maerl bottoms”, built by free calcareous Spondilus rodophites, the “forests” of Axinella sponges, together with the richness and abundance of Serranid fish, particularly in the grouper genus (Epinephelus). Other priority habitats for conservation, such as the coraligenous communities and the semi-dark caves, are also rich in protected Mediterranean species (Table 1; Map1). The diversity of marine and geomorphological structures like rocky islands, chalck cliff, sandy beaches and dunes, and underwater reefs also gives the area an important scenic value. On land, 451 plant species have been identified on the coastal tract, out of which 41 are rare, endemic or already receiving some kind of legal protection (cit. Becker et al 2004). There are also important archaeological, cultural and landscape values, which originally led to the declaration of both National Parks. Throughout human history, the Akhziv and Rosh Haniqra area has been used by diverse cultures (Phoenician, Hebrew, European, Arabic) for settlements and strategic passage point for trade caravans and armies, leaving behind a diverse and valuable cultural heritage in this area.


Species/Areas LO sFA CC SDC sRB dRB LSB

Axinella cannabina - - ++ - - - -

Axinella polypoides - - ++ + - - -

Tethya spp. plur. - - ++ - - - -

Charonia tritonis - ++ + - - - -

Dendropoma petraeum ++ - - - - - -

Erosaria spurca - ++ + - + + -

Lithophaga lithophaga + ++ + ++ - - -

Luria lurida - ++ + - + + -

Pinna nobilis - + - - + -

Ocypode cursor - - - - - - ++

Scyllarides latus - - + ++ -

Scyllarides pygmaeus - - + - - ++ -

Epinephelus aeneus - + ++ + - -

Epinephelus costae - + ++ + - - -

Epinephelus marginatus - ++ ++ + - + -

Mycteroperca rubra - ++ ++ + - - -

Diplodus cevinus - ++ + - - - -

Sciaena umbra - ++ + + - - -

Umbrina cirrosa - ++ - - - - -

Nesting beachs (marine turtles) - - - - - - ++

Nº spp. 2 12 15 8 3 4 2

Table 1 (Ramos et al 2004). Distribution of the protected Mediterranean marine species from Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv area in the priority habitats. Habitats: (LO) littoral organic concretions (vermetids); (sFA) shallow fucales association; (CC) coralligenous community; (SDC) semi-dark caves community; (sRB) shallow rhodolithes beds; (dRB) deep rhodolithes beds; (LSB) littoral fine sand beaches. Estimated presence: (++) preferred habitat; (+) secondary habitat; (-) not present. As a summary, Box 1 considers the most important natural (and cultural) values in the RHAMR area (and see Map 1): The Erythrean case The RHAMR area is under a significant impact from Erythrean species invading the Mediterranean Sea since the opening of the Suez Canal in 1864. Goren and Galil (2004) explain that “some abundant invaders are exploited commercially and usually form up to 40-50% of the fish crop in the shallow water (<100 m.) along the Israeli coast (Golani & Ben Tuvia, 1995). Other invaders constitute a nuisance or economic burden, while yet others outcompete the native species, either wholly or in part, for their habitat space (Galil, 1999). The invaders are also well represented in shallow rocky habitats where they comprise ca. 50% of the fish biomass and caused a fundamental change in the food web (Goren & Galil 2001; Lundberg et al. 2004)”....“ Two of the three most abundant fish, Pempheris vanicolensis

and Sargocentron rubrum, are Erythrean invasive species. Likewise, the Erythrean snapping shrimp Alpheus audouini is the single most abundant decapod species in our samples. In fact, it is four times as abundant as both native alpheids, A. dentipes and A. macrocheles, and the native Synalpheus gambarelloides was replaced by the Erythrean invasive S. hululensis. Invasive Erythrean mollusks are as common as to change the habitat itself: Brachidontes pharaonis forms dense “carpets” on the intertidal platforms and in nooks and crannies of the supratidal fringe, several pyramidellid gastropods (ectoparasites of polychaetes and other) are quite common in the subtidal, whereas Pinctada radiata and Spondylus spinosus aggregate on the offshore kurkar ridges”.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

3

35

60

46

35 25

27

33 11

14

11

25

29

48

35

40

49

5,2

5,52,7

7,6

7,3

5,2

9,19,8

8,8

7,9

7,6

6,4

8,2

141

10,1

18,6

13,4

13,1 18,6

16,8

11,318,3

11,9

12,5

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Sand + Rock

Rock + Coarse Sand

Rock + Coarse Sand

Rock + Coarse Sand

Sand + Rock + Coarse Sand





Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock

Rock + Sand

Coarse Sand

Coarse Sand + Sand



Coarse Sand + Rock + Sand

#

#

#

[¶

[¶

[¶

[¶

[¥

[¥

[µ

[µ

[µ #MAP 1: NATURAL VALUES

£ Meters300 600 900 1.200

# Historical Site Bathimetric lines10

Depth in meters!{

!. Sea BeadRocky Coast

[µ Fish Nursery Area

Underwater CanyonUnderwater Corridor

[¶ Turtle Nesting Grounds[¥ Bird Colonies

Coastal Dune

Vermetid HabitatBeach

Coraligenous FormationMaerl Rodolite Formation

Kurkar Ridge-Rocky Bottom

Pistachia lentiscus

Rosh Hanikra

Sand Dunes

Coastal Platform with Dendr

Spondilus sp

(G.Vilar)

opoma

RH Terrace and grotto

Pancratium maritimum

Pools in coastal platform

Axinela sp

(G.Vilar)

(G.Vilar)
(G.Vilar)
(G.Vilar)
(G.Vilar)
(Univ.Alicante)
(Univ.Alicante)


BOX 1: MAIN NATURAL AND CULTURAL VALUES OF THE ROSH HANIQRA-AKHZIV MARINE RESERVE Cultural values:

• Rosh Haniqra grottos and history • Phoenician, crusade and muslim structures in Akhziv site, and museum • Phoenician graveyards

Landscape:

• Rosh Haniqra cliffs and caves • Eroded sandrock flats on the coast • Original coastal vegetation of Psitachia lentiscus close to Rosh Haniqra • Unbuilt beaches

Marine and coastal habitats:

• Vermetid reefs of Dendropoma petraeum (supra-littoral). • Underwater kurkar, old coastline (rocky ridge 10-30 m deep). • Underwater canyon (>50 m deep), with demersal shrimp climbing up to 60m deep (Galil com.pers.). • Rocky coast north of Bezet beach: breeding grounds for Serranid species. • Rocky islets: breeding grounds for seabirds: common tern (Sterna hirundo) and resting site for Phalacrocorax carbo(and

P.aristotelis?) cormorants. • “Maerl” bottoms of Spondilus rodolites (10 m deep). • Sandy beaches: breeding grounds for Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas and habitat for the vulnerable ghost crab

(Ocypode cursor). Marine species protected under the Barcelona Convention

15 species in Annex II (Endangered of threatened species): Rodophita: Ptilophora mediterránea Porifera: Axinella cannabina; Axinella polypoides; Tethya sp.plur. Mollusca: Charonia tritonis; Dendropoma petraeum; Erosaria spurca; Gibula nivosa; Litophaga litophaga; Luria lurida; Pinna nobilis. Crustaceans: Ocypode cursor Reptiles: Caretta caretta; Chelonia mydas. Aves: Phalacrocorax aristotelis (¿)

6 species in Annex III (Species whose exploitation is regulated):

Echinodermata: Paracentrotus lividus; Crustaceans: Scyllarides latus; Scyllarus pygmaeus; Fishes: Epinephelus marginatus; Sciaena umbra; Umbrina cirrosa.

2.2. Socioeconomic context and present uses Around the RHAMR, the rural area of the Matte Asher municipality (c.a. 500 Km2), including all the smaller villages in the area, holds around 18.000 inhabitants, a density of 36 hab/Km2 which is only slightly higher than the mean for most Mediterranean rural coastal areas. But unlike most of those areas, Matte Asher displays an apparently healthy social profile (good services, infrastructures, social organisation, education, training and capacity levels), which rest on an relatively diversified economy -based on services (including tourism), intensive agriculture, small industries and some fisheries- and on an existing land use and land tenure scheme preventing from land accumulation, drastic land use changes and future dense urban concentrations (Map 2). All together it helps to avoid uncontrolled over exploitation of resources, social displacements, risk of poverty or claims of social and traditional rights on the reserve resources; so with a relative advantage over other Mediterranean coastal environments, these characteristics set some basic layers for sustainability. For the time being, the tense political situation along the border with Lebanon also prevents from a possible demographic or economic growth inland which could exert preassure over the coastal/marine natural resources in the short term. Military control also restricts new infrastructures and access in a corridor along the border

including national waters (500 m wide during the day and 2500 m at night) providing an indirect protection to the marine environment. The whole situation, however, may drastically change in a foreseen future of peace. Today, the main demands over the marine area respond to recreation and to a smaller degree to fisheries. Fishing in the study area is mostly recreational, although there is some locally-based commercial activity. Four types of fisheries can be found (Cohen com.pers.):

• Trawling: 3 trawler boats from Ashkelon and Haifa frecuent the area between 1 Km and 3 km away from the coast, up to the head of the underwater canyon; • Drift and smaller nets: eventual fisheries (mainly in winter time) by local fishermen from Akko and Nahariyya, mostly small gears aiming at self-consumption or local commerce; • Rod fishing is a very common recreational activity; in peak days up to 300 rod fishermen can be counted along the rocky shores of the concerned area; • Spearfishing, either in apnea or -surprisingly enough- with scuba equipment, takes place along the first rocky ridge, mainly for fish (Serranidae, usually groupers) and lobster (Scillares latus).


There is no socioeconomic study on these local fisheries, although Park managers, environmental experts, local authorities and tourism services interviewed in the area (not fishermen) agree that restricting any of these fishing practices should not cause a socioeconomic problem in the area. Actually all these activities, except trawling, take place inside the existing marine reserve area, consequently being ilegal. Trawling is legal outside the existing marine wildlife reserve. However, as compared to other international standards, the national law can be considered permissive when allowing this activity at 15m deep (being forbidden at 50m in most Mediterranean countries, and there is a strong international conservation movement to ban this whole activity considered as largely unsustainable). Trawlers are known, however, to be mid-term beneficiaries of the marine reserve “spill-over effect” (Jimenez 2003). Tourism and visitation (a detailed description is given in Section “5.3. PUBLIC USE”) The richness of natural, cultural and recreation values make this area an important resource to attract a variety of visitors. Marine environments provide open space and thus the opportunity for leisure, relaxation, contemplation and physical activity. Marine protected areas have a certain mystique to travelers interested in naturalness and wildlife richness and thus may produce preassure and risk on their natural resources. In Israel, with up to 1,65 million visitors in 1988, legislation describes National Parks as being “first and foremost intended for enjoyment of the visitor”. Recreation is one of the major attractions within marine and coastal areas and, specially in the Mediterranean, also a major industry in coastal countries. Map 3 displays the boundaries of the existing protected areas, and the present recreational facilities and activities. All the way -coastal or marine- between the two existing National Parks is free to visit in the daytime, except the marine extension under military control close to the border. A short description of the main recreation demands and attractions in the RHAMR 2 follows. The number of visitors was estimated by Becker et al (2004) on a total of c.a. 250.000 visitors/year (some of them visiting more than one site):

• Rosh Haniqra National Park (212.000 visitors/year): grottos, cliffs and landscape, cableway and other services. Entrance fee 3. • Akhziv National Park (60.000 v/y): An archaeological and natural site with a history

of Phoenician, Crusade and Muslim cultures, including a public beach. Entrance fee. It also includes a private hotel and beach (Club Med) and a public beach (Banana) also under entrance fee.

2 Considerable more detail on visitation activities is given in Section 5.3.on Public Use. 3 The Qibutz in RH holds an old concession to manage the RH National Park. This Park receives around 250.000 visitors a year, and there are crowding problems on holidays and week-ends, overcrowded parking lots; there are no guided tours to the grottos, except for VIPs, but there is an option to take the little train along the beach on a one hour-long circuit.

• Other beaches (70.000 v/y) 4: north of the Akhziv NP, the Bezet beach is open to the public, and constitutes the free beach that every municipality, in this case Matte Asher, must provide by law in Israel. Bezet beach includes a disco and some facilities for windsurfing and a local sailing school. The management responsibilities for the beach are shared between NPA and the Municipality. The beach cleaning is done in coordination by both authorities, and part of the benefits from the disco concession pays for the cleaning expenses. • Marine uses (other than fishing), include swimming, snorkeling, diving (c.a. 10.000 v/y), sailing, motor boating, and jet-skiing. These activities are assessed in detail in Section 5.3. • Lodging is estimated in 12.500 – 45.000 nights a year, only including Akhziv and RH recreation sites, not the hotels in close-by cities or in the Club Med. • Transportation on the marine area, other than for recreational purposes, is not a conservation concern, as there are no harbors, marinas, docks or mooring sites in the area, while most of it is closed to civilian use because of the border situation. One or two army boats patrol de marine site. • On land the main use is recreational. A coastal dirt road running along the dune was recently paved and opened to the public as a trade-off with the Regional Council in order to gain a protection status over other relevant tracts of the beach. The opening of the coastal road has created a convenient parking stock avoiding the beach, but attracts many more visitors with a negative impact on sensitive areas of the proposed reserve. • The marine area is impacted by debris and pollution from land based sources, either garbage left behind by visitors or brought in by marine currents and river overflows, and by sewage outlets from either an urban settlement and an agricultural factory (see Map 4), a fact of major conservation concern due to its impact on coastal invertebtate communities.

A socioeconomic study on the recreation activities of Rosh Haniqra – Akhziv area was recently issued by the University of Haifa (Becker et al 2004). They present the following summary of “benefits provided by the coastline through stakeholder identification”:

4 During the swimming season (5 months) the peak visitation days are friday (2500 visitors), saturday (3500) and sunday (2000), and around 750 on each of the rest of the week days (by Guy Cohen, cit. Becker 2004). Out of season the reserve is almost empty.

4

LEBANON

Scatered Thicket

Facilities

Dense Urban Area

Industry

Pasture

Fish-Farm

Irrigation Pool

Irrigated Fruit Trees

Scatered Thicket

Beach

Facilities

Industry

Pasture

Dense Grove

Rocky Coast

Scatered Urban Area

Mixed Irrigated Land

Facilities

Beach

Facilities

Dense Grove

Irrigated Fruit Trees

Scatered GroveBeach

Pasture

Industry Scatered Thicket

Eucalyptus

Scatered Urban Area

Industry

IndustryIndustrial

Pool

Scatered Thicket

Beach

Irrigated Land

Akhziv Island

Segavyon Island

4

4

Industry£

Land Use in Rosh Haniqra and Akhziv National Parks Area

MAP 2:

Shahaf Island

Nahli´eli Island

Tekhelet Island

Meters250 500 750 1.000

Land Use

Industry

Dense urban Area

Facilities

Industrial or Irrigation Pool

Fish-Farm

Dense Grove

Eucalyptus

Scatered Thicket

Pasture

Beach

Mixed Irrigated Land

Irrigated Land

Irrigation Fruit Trees

Rocky Coast

Soil or Rock

Sea

National Park

Natural Reserve

Building Plan

Railway

Main RoadRoadTrack

4

Lebanon

Hotel

Scattered Urban Area

Scattered Grove

Æb

!.!y

!¤

!v

d

d

d

d

IAIA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

!v

!v

!v

!v

!v

!v

SI;I*!Â&!³!Tr

!°!5!² R

^"i(SI;I*

"í

"i("í^SI; I*

e

4

4

"[x"[x

"[x

4

!r

!r

"[x

"[x

"[x

"[x

"[x

"[x

!r

!r

e

£Meters

500 1.000 1.500 2.000250

LEBANON

BBoo

aattss

TTrr

iippss

ttoo

RRoo

sshh

HHaa

nnii kk

rr aa

Current Public Uses and Facilities in Rosh Haniqra and Akhziv National Parks Area

MAP 3:

ËÌ

ËÌ

^

S Restaurant/Bar

I; Disco/Parties

I* Toilets/Shower/Changing rooms

!Â Cable car

!³ Gift shop

!Tr Touristic train

IA Parking

!v Diving Club

R Guest Room

4 HotelËÌ

!v Diving

!r Swimming area

!² Drinking water

"í Lifeguard

"i( Hammock/Parasol

d View point

!° Children playground

"[x Rods fishing

!¤ Sailing club

Main Urban Structure

Secondary Urban Structure

Industry and Services

!5 Picnic area

School faclities

& Audio-visual display

^ Camping area

Road

Railway

Proposed Natural Reserve

Marine Natural ReserveBeach Natural Reserve

National Park

Beach

Public Beach


U S E V A L U E S N O N U S EV A L U E S

R U S H H A N I K R A -A C H Z I V C O A S T L I N E

N O NM A R K E T

N a t u r a lb e n e f i t s

H a b i t a t

L a n d s c a p e s

D i v e r s eW i l d l i f e

N a t u r a l B e a u t y

M i l i t a r y a n dS e c u r i t y

M u n i c i p a lU s e s M A R K E T

H i s t o r i c a l a n dC u l t u r a l

N a t u r eR e s e r v e s

P o p u l a r T o u r i s tD e s t i n a t i o n

D i v i n g S i t e

R e c r e a t i o n a lS i t e s

C a b l e C a r

W a s t e w a t e rt r e a t m e n t

A g r i c u l t u r a lU t i l i z e

R e c r e a t i o n a lS e r v i c e s

B e q u e a t h i n g

E x i s t a n t

Source: Becker et at 2004 Based on this identification, Becker et al (2004) estimate the use and non-use values of the area (divided into commercial and cultural-ecological values). The methodology included the TCM (Travel Cost Method), which estimates what visitors actually spend when visiting the area, including travel; and the CVM (Contingent Valuation Method) based on the willingness to pay from actual or potential consumers, estimated by their actual expenditures to reach the site (use value) or their declared willingness to contribute to the conservation of these natural and cultural assets, either for themselves or for future generations (non-use). “The results point out the commercial value of the site itself is about 20 million NIS (about 4.5 million U$)5. CVM results reveal a total value of about 65 Million NIS, out of which the use value is about 35 Million NIS” (Becker op.cit). These authors conclude that the preservation value of the area is high enough to be considered an economic alternative in any further development plans for the region. However, these calculations (done in 2004) could be reviewed to raising figures in the future, as the declaration and enlargement of any Marine Reserve will attract many more new visitors (e.g. see Dixon 1993 or Jimenez 2000 for reviews on this topic). The most significant factor influencing the number of visitors to an MPA is its accesibility (Jimenez 2000), particularly how close it is to land transportation. Our site is just a few hundred meters from a parking lot. The tourism attraction by MPAs has several influences: the frecuentation increases and also looses seasonality, the visitors tend to expend more, but also need and demand more services; while a direct relationship

5 1 € = 5,3 NIS (aprox) (2004)

exists with the number of new businesses arising. Dixon (1993) makes an economic analysis on MPAs, concluding that these are good businesses; while the direct benefits are very significant -usually diving is the main business averaging c.a. 70-100 U$ daily expenditure per visitor (see Table 2)- the estimated indirect benefits may be 7 to 50 times higher. For the moment, the mean WTP in the proposed reserve is of 61.1 NIS (13.5 U$), which leaves a very significant margin for economic growth.

Country Divers / year Total income

Daily expenditure

Australia 1.3 million 103 M U$ 79,2 U$

Corsica (France) 76.000 6.5 M

U$ 85,5 U$

Medas (Spain) 53.000 5.2 M

U$ 98,1 U$

Columbretes isls. (Spa) 2.500 300.000

U$ 120 U$

Table 2. Expenditure per daily diving visitor in MPAs of Australia and other 3 Mediterranean sites (Dixon 1993)


2.3. Conservation problems Some factors affecting the RHAMR, even having an ultimate human origin, are out of control, certainly at the local level, such as the invasion of Oculina patagonica -a species imported through blast waters-, the impact from Erythrean marine invaders (see previous Section), and the foreseen negative effects of climate change and warming of the local waters to levels that may affect the system’s diversity, capacity to face invading or opportunistic species, and its resilience to recuperate. However, many more human-caused impacts (see Map 4)6 have a local origin and most of them can be faced through protection and management. With the information available, (a) Goren and Galil (2004), (b) Ramos et al (2004), (c) Guy Cohen (com.pers) and (d) ourselves, we can underline the following conservation problems in the RHAMR: i) Concerning particular species warranting special attention, because they are especially vulnerable to anthropogenic disturbance:

• “The once common ghost crab, Ocypode cursor, which digs burrows in lower intertidal sand beaches, has suffered from the unchecked tourist development and beach “cleaning” devices destroying its burrows” (a). • “The Mediterranean slipper lobster, Scyllarides latus, the largest lobster along the Levantine coast, is being speared to extinction by “sport” fishermen” (a) (c). • “The larger serranids, Epinephelus costae, Epinephelus marginatus and Mycteroperca rubra, form large schools during the reproductive season, and their populations have been decimated by spearfishermen” (a) (b) (c). • Marine turtles Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas (30-40 nests) are disturbed by security lighting on the beach, both adults searching for a nesting site as the hatchlings dissoriented by the competing light source (c)(d). The NPA is relocating nests into fenced plots protecting them from predators (dogs and foxes), human disturbance, and light influence, reporting a 80% hatchling success (c). The light just behind the fenced plot is turned off during the hatchling season. • Rod fishing from the coast has not been studied as a possible source of disturbance to fish populations but is deemed to cause impact on the serranid fish communities, and to sesile invertebrates picked as bait (a) (b) (c). • Roosting and nesting seabird colonies are eventually disturbed by recreation motor boats

and people swimming far away and resting on the islets (c).

6 Map 4: Sources of human preassure and environmental impact: areas under present visitation, either intensive or extensive, overused either by recreational or fishing activities, vulnerable, under environmental risk, or requiring restoration; polluted or under other sources of threat.

• On the narrow land strip of the RHAMR, dune invaders (trees as Eucaliptus sp. and Acacia sp., herbs as Heteroteca), are very common and displacing the autoctonous dune vegetation species (such as the sea lily (Pancratium maritimum) and Psitachia lentiscus.

ii) Other conservation problems in the RHAMR can be summarized as follows:

• The vermetid colonies are dead in over a 90% due to eutrofication from sewage outlets (b). “The reef-building gastropods that build the foreshore platforms along the coast, are impacted greatly from the sewage outlets, that adding nutrients, caused macroalgae to overgrow them, and are (now dead and) prone to erosion” (a) • The opening of the coastal road has created a convenient parking stock avoiding the invasion of the beach by motor vehicles, but attracts many more visitors with a negative impact on sensitive areas of the proposed reserve (a) (b) (c) (d). • Intense visitation and free visiting around causes a conspicuous stepping erosion in the coastal platform and anywhere in the sand-dunes (d). • Free camping and picnic cause landcape degradation and constitute a source of garbage and disturbance to vulnerable or protected species on the beach (d) • Garbage, either tipped by visitors, brought in by marine currents or by river overflows (plastics, nylon threads and all types of debris), has a serious aesthetical impact and may also be a conservation concern (c) (d). • There is a risk of biological pollution from the aquaculture farm, although to date it only works with autoctonous species (c).

Therefore, the main sources of conservation problems are:

• Free access and activities on dunes and coastal platform; • Trawling and illegal spearfishing; • Sewage outflows and garbage disposal on land and by sea currents.

Other conservation problems are away from the reserve’s management control:

• Erythrean species in the sea • Security needs 24 hour lighting • Further uncontrolled pollution sources (Nahariyya sewage) (driven garbage) • Asbestos waste has been buried in this coastline (Becker 2004)

As traced by Becker et al (2004) “the shoreline accomodates infrastructures, municipal, military, industrial area, agricultural, recreation and unfortunately, sewage outlets. In addittion, there is a continued preassure for further development related to commercial human activities”, including plans or perspectives for extended


parking lots, new guest rooms (Eli Avivi), Club Med extension, and new activities in “Banana” beach.

A summary of the main negative effects from human activities in the RHARM is presented in Table 3:

Table 3. MAIN NEGATIVE EFFECTS FROM HUMAN ACTIVITIES IN RHAMR

Estimated seriousness

ACTIVITY

ACTION

MAIN ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL IMPACT 1 2 3

Impact on Serranids ? Net fishing Resource extraction Decreasing lobster population ¿ Walk on rocks Unintended erosion vermetid reef Picking bait Destruction of sesile molluscs ? Rod fishing Fishing Unknown impact on fish

Unintended harm in sea bottoms Diving Cave habitat alteration Long size fish eliminated Diving

Spearfishing Long size lobsters eliminated Commercial fisheries Trawling Unselective impact on fish and benthic communities

Speeding on swimmers or turtles Motor boating ot jet-skiing Anchoring on vulnerable bottom

Sailing Anchoring on vulnerable bottom Nautic activities

Windsurfing

Swimming Long swim to islets Scaring seabirds away

Parking Noise, congestion, excess visitation

Walk beach at night Possible disturbance to marine turtles and ghost crabs

Walk on dunes

Beach use

Camping Dune erosion, disturbance to fauna and flora

Agriculture activities Organic pollution Deadly impact on vermetid reef

Army patrol Beach lights Disturbance of invertebrate and turtle reproductive behaviour

2.4. Management weaknesses The existing management of RHAMR includes diverse mechanisms for visitor control particularly during the seaturtle breeding and bird nesting seasons as well as specific regulations on marine resources harvesting. To date, however, the available information and public awareness on ecological values, particularly marine, is unsufficient. Although the main conservation problems identified are not always caused by visitation, information and education programmes can play an important role in improving general environmental quality by raising public awareness. A wider set of perceived problems are displayed in Table 4, subject to a cause-effect analysis helping to identify the main underlying causes, which could be summarised as:

• Easy access by motor vehicles to the whole coastline • Unappropriate zoning in land and sea and reglamentation to meet the area’s strong recreational demand • Unsufficient surveillance and enforcement in land and sea • NPA unsufficient means (human

resources and equipment)

• Lack of environmental information and interpretation • Organic pollution from local agricultural factory

Indeed, the RHAMR area is facing an scenario that, in the absence of a Reserve Decree or law and management Plan, may be a source of conservation conflicts. Some future threats relate to possible touristic development in Matte Asher municipality. Today there are around 115 rooms on the area, including a holiday village in Akhziv, and up to 750 rooms in its inmediate sorroundings, but these figures have a significant growth perspective, as 5 rooms per home are allowed in the neighbouring Qibutzin and Moshavin, which may raise the number of rooms to some 2000-3000 for the whole Matte Asher municipality. Addittionally there are 2 (or 3 depending on the plans) new areas allocated for building purposes, one of them for a total of c.a. 400 apartments in the very border of the Nature Reserve (behing Bezet beach) (see Maps 2 and 3). In the future there will also be preassure for more diving concessions. Even regulated, the known impacts from legal diving are: accidental destruction of sensitive species, turbidity, changing behaviour on fishes, anchoring, and illumination (Gonzalez-Serrano 1995).


Considering all these facts, Goren & Galil (2004) conclude that “The unique habitats of RH-Akhziv Nature Reserve, one of the most diverse littoral ecosystems in the Mediterranean coast of Israel, is under a threat of destruction due to municipal development of the coast....the reserve, is also subject to heavy recreational and fishery preassure”.

Other scenarios relate to the possibility of peace declaration and subsequent re-establishment of commercial relations with Lebanon, and the building of the already planned transboundary highway -which would some day connect most of the coast in the Middle East, a perspective with huge touristic potentialities. Such event would certainly attract new investors and raise preassures for land use allocations, new infrastructures, multlplied number of visitors and hence, environmental concerns.

Table 4: TREE OF PROBLEMS

MAIN PROBLEM: The overuse of RHAMR causes more conservation problems than human benefits

Problem seriousness

Underlying causes Conse-

quences

Perceived problem 1 2 3

Impacted resource

Crowded parking lots COASTAL Erosion on sand dunes COASTAL Garbage on the coast COASTAL Impact on turtle nesting MARINE

No Zoning and regla-mentation

Easy and free human access

Erosion on coastal platform MARINE Impact on Ocypode crabs MARINE

Disturbance to seabirds MARINE

Visitors are not sensibilized MANAGEMENT

No Envir. Info. and guiding to public

Excess visitation and Low quality visitation

No services for visitors MANAGEMENT

Unsufficient research and informat. MANAGEMENT

Unsufficient monitoring MANAGEMENT Visitors do not pay fees or services MANAGEMENT

NPA mandate weak

Old concessions preveal over NPA

Unsufficient funding sources MANAGEMENT

Netting and ghost nets MARINE Spearfishing grouper & lobst. MARINE Bait gathering ¿ MARINE

illegal fishing

Rod fishing over fish species ¿ MARINE

Unsufficient NPA resources

Weak surveillance and enforcement Pollution Death of vermetids MARINE

2 0

10

30

5

10

10

10

MAP 4: IMPACTS

£

!v

IAIA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

Meters500 750 1.000125

LEBANON

Motorboat

Intensive Use BeachOther Roads

Traditional Fishing

Building Plans

Agricultural Sewage

LOW AND MEDIUM IMPACT

Boat Trips

HIGH IMPACT

Industrial Sewage

Uncontroled Access, Stepping and Bait

!v Spear-Fishing Scuba Diving

ParkingIA

Trawling Fishing

Railway

Coastal Road

Rod fishing

Bathimetric lines10

Urban, Industry and Facilities Areas

(G.Vilar)

Coastal View of the reserve

(G.Vilar)

(G.Vilar)

Rod fishing on the coastal platform

(WWF)

Diver and grouper

Akhziv beach in winter

(G.Vilar)

Fishermen in the area

(G.Vilar)

(G.Vilar)

(G.Vilar)

Fishing from the cliff

Club Med Beach, Akhziv

RH Cable Car and terrace


2.5. SWOT Analysis

I N T E R N A L

STRENGTHS

• Already protected areas in land (National Parks

and beach reserves) • Legal marine protection for flora and fauna • Clear institutional mandate for NPA • Significant economic valuation of RH-Akhziv

National Parks • Strong Tourism Association existing with vision

of nature assets on the coast and the interior • Qualified and motivated staff in NPA

WEAKNESSES (see Table 4)

• Easy access and free visitation to all the area

(except National Parks) • NPA has an uncomplete institutional control over

externalities • Some old concessions (e.g. RH Qibutz or

building lots previous to Coastal Law), and non conditioned concessions (e.g. diving)

• Unsufficient financial resources for NPA • Unsufficient public use and education

programmes • Unsufficient personnel and resources to control

fisheries and visitation

E X T E R N A L

OPPORTUNITIES

Strategic: • Barcelona Convention and SPA Protocol

Ratification by Israel • Perspectives for a Transboundary Reserve • The existing local Master Plans share a vision of

land use ordination quality and relatively low building density

• The new road is planned behind the coast • There is an abandoned railroad

Institutional: • Colaboration between NPA, Army and fishing

authorities • Fund raising opportunities where visitor facilities

and services exist • Law for “Marinas”, restriction to 14 in Israel,

none in the area Socioeconomic:

• Well known cultural-natural area in Israel • Closed zone at marine border surveyed and

socially accepted • Diversified local land use and economy • School groups visiting RH provide an

environmental education opportunity • SPNI and volunteers quarters at the site

THREATS

NON-LOCAL

• Erythrean species invasion • Trawling from 15 m deep is legal • National demographic growth in Israel • Development scenario after peace:

o Growing visitation demand o Coastal international road and boat

access increased: higher tourism and fisheries preassure

LOCAL Marine:

• Commercial fisheries (trawlers and fishermen claims).

• Un-controlled pollution and garbage sources. Coastal:

• Building perspectives for over 300 apartmnts • Promoters pressing for new lodgement do not

consider conservation objectives. • Growing visitation scenario to RH and the

beach: Club Med, enlarged tourism services • Public beach has unsufficient environmental and

conservation management.


III. RESERVE OBJECTIVES AND CONSERVATION CATEGORY 3.1. Reserve Objectives The Rosh Haniqra National Park is already a Mediterranean Specially Protected Area (SPA), proposed by Israel to the Barcelona Convention in 1987. The reviewed Protocol on Specially Protected Areas (1995) of the Barcelona Convention, signed by the State of Israel in 1995 (but not yet ratified) establishes in its Article 3 (General Obligations) that “Each Party shall take the necessary measures to:

a) protect, preserve and manage in a sustainable and environmentally sound way areas of particular natural or cultural value, notably by the establishment of specially protected areas;

b) protect, preserve and manage threatened or endangered species of flora and fauna.”

Considering this national commitment the objectives for the proposed marine Reserve can be set on the basis of its natural values. The main objective for RHAMR should be the conservation of the marine environmental heritage. However, the RHAMR should incorporate other management objectives making it inclusive with the existing human demands, threats and opportunities in the area (as previously analysed in Chapter II). The main secondary or management objective would be the provision of regulated opportunities for recreation and education. Together with Conservation, both objectives respond to the main conclusions in the specific studies from Goren and Galil (2004), Ramos et al (2004) and Becker et al (2004), and from our own analyses. Other management objectives, recommended by the previous analyses, include research and monitoring, and the contribution to the Reserve’s self-finance, while offering opportunities for local development and improved natural resource management. The latter objective would be consistent with the concept of an international SPAMI (Specially Protected Area of Mediterranean Importance) (see ahead). a) Proposed General Objectives for the RHAMR:

1. Conservation of the coastal/marine environmental and cultural heritage

2. The sustainable management of the RHAMR through appropriate:

a.

b. Zoning and interinstitutional

coordination c. Public information,

sensibilisation and education d. Scientific research and

monitoring, and e. Contribution to the Reserve

self-finance, while offering opportunities for local development and improved natural resource management

b) Proposed Specific Objectives for the RHAMR:

1. Conservation of the marine and cultural heritage 7

a) “Representative types of coastal

and marine ecosystems of adequate size to ensure their long-term viability and to maintain their biological diversity”: such as the limestone-chalk cliffs and grottos, and the head of underwater canyon;

b) “Habitats which are in danger of disappearing in their natural area of distribution in the Mediterranean or which have a reduced natural area of distribution as a consequence of their regression or on account of their intrinsically restricted area”: such as the vermetid reefs;

c) “Habitats critical to the survival, reproduction and recovery of endangered, threatened or endemic species of flora or fauna”, such as the coraligenous formations, the Kurkar ridge, the sand beaches and the islets;

d) “Sites of particular importance because of their scientific, aesthetic, cultural or educational interest”, such as the two National Parks and the visitation areas.

To which the following may be added:

e) The protection of species listed under the Barcelona Convention, Protocol V, Annexes II and III (see our Annex 1), and the protection of any other depleted, threatened,

7 In itallic font, the actual text of the Article 4 of the V Protocol of the Barcelona Convention on the Objectives of SPAs


endangered, rare or endemic species and populations.

f) To protect and manage areas of significance to the life-cycles of economically important species, and the recuperation of degraded habitats and populations.

g) To protect and manage natural aesthetic values and historical and cultural sites for present and future generations.

2. Management Objectives

Meeting the international standards for a Specially Protected Area of Mediterranean Importance (SPAMI), which include:

- The implementation of Management programmes, including surveillance, public information, sensibilisation and education.

- To provide for research and training, and for monitoring of the environmental effects of human activities, including the direct and indirect effects of development and adjacent land-use and marine resource use practices

- The contribution to the Reserve self-finance

- Offering opportunities for local development and improved natural resource management 8

- The elaboration and implementation of a Management Plan.

3.2. Delimitation of the new Reserve An internationally accepted definition for a Marine Protected Area is: “Any area of sea or ocean, where appropriate in combination with contiguous intertidal areas, together with associated natural and cultural features in the water column, within, or on top of the seabed, for which measures have been taken for the purpose of protecting part or all of the enclosed environment” (IUCN 2003). The new RHAMR will take advantage of all existing protected areas, land-use opportunities and favourable land-ownership in this tract of coast, and avoiding ecological fragmentation. Even for most marine ecological processes the RHAMR will be necessarily small, it may still successfully comply with its objectives:

- Conservation: small marine reserves are known to succesfully protect habitat samples and species populations, particularly non-migratory or locally breeding vertebrates, and invertebrate species with no planktonic stages,

providing nursery areas, and allowing a biomass increase in local fish stocks.

8 This objective can be considered accomplished in the present socioeconomic situation in which the economic spill-off of the existing National Parks is very significant (Becker et al 2004) while the expectations for commercial fisheries in the RHAMR are relatively very low.

- Sustainable management: small marine reserves are less costy to manage, and allow sharing responsabilities and coordinated actions with local stakeholders. Their role in terms of scientific research, in eduaction and training, and in public sensibilisation may be as important as in much broader marine reserves. Small marine reserves also offer interesting fund-raising opportunities.

A marine area of 1000 ha is considered minimum for an effective conservation and conservation/surveillance cost-benefit relationship (Tisdell & Broadus 1989). Within this proposed minimum, the RHAMR should include as much of habitat quality and quantity in order to comply with its conservation objectives. Therefore, visitation accesses and any other sources of alteration, most of them in land, should as possible be under the Reserve’s Authority control. Finally, the RHAMR borders should be as easy as possible to recognise in the field. The proposed new RHAMR boundaries (see Maps 5a and 5b) would be as follows: North: Lebanese border up to 2 nautical miles (c.a.3700 m) from the coast. West: From the northern point at 2 nautical miles from the coast, then strait southwards along the meridian, never under the isobath of 50m. This allows including the head of the underwater canyon, down to the depth of 100-120 m, thus including interesting demersal species. South: a line including the outermost border of the protected area 200 m south of the southernmost islet. On land it would reach aprox. 500 m south of Akhziv National Park, thus including this interesting turtle nesting beach (but see two options on southern border). East: Two options: • A) (Map 5a): Following the boundaries of all the existing protected areas, including Bezet beach and the beach south of Akhziv in order to ensure their compatibility of management with the protected area. It may also include a small area of 6 ha for visitors facilities (such as parking and camping, see more detail given in Maps 6a, 6b and 7). • B) (Map 5b): Same as option A but excluding the beaches which are today under other authority’s management, beaches today unprotected (Bezet, and beaches immediately north and south of Akhziv National Park) (see Map 6c). Taking option A) the whole RHAMR would be of 2.488 ha, of which 2.261ha are marine and 127 ha are terrestrial. In the case that option B) is chosen, it would be slightly smaller in land, about 90ha in total.


3.3. Conservation category and international status Under the Israeli Law, the RHAMR would be considered as a Marine Reserve 9. It is advisable to consider the existing National Parks of Rosh Haniqra and Akhziv as integral parts of the new Reserve, for which the most convenient conservation category should be identified by the NPA, after considering international criteria. The international Protected Area categories proposed by IUCN (see Table 5) would better fit the new RHAMR within the concept of a (small) National Park. However, in Israel this name is given to the otherwise internationally known as “Natural Monuments” 10. Table 5 – IUCN Conservation Categories Categ

ory NAME OBJECTIVES

I Strict Natural Reserve

Managed mainly for science or wilderness protection

II National Park Managed mainly for ecosystem

protection, science and recreation

III Natural Monument

Unique and rare representative areas of cultural or aesthetic value, managed mainly for

conservation of specific natural or cultural features

IV

Habitats/species

management area

Managed mainly for conservation through

management intervention, to meet requirements of specific

species or habitats

V Protected

Landscape/Seascape

Protected mainly for landscape/seascape

conservation, managed resources, traditional uses,

sustainable flow of produces and services

VI

Managed Resource Protected

Area

Managed mainly for the sustainable use of natural

ecosystems

Other than this, the NPA could be interested in meeting the international criteria to allow considering the new RHAMR as a Specially Protected Area of Mediterranean Importance (SPAMI) under the Barcelona Convention. Article 8 of the V Protocol states that the SPAMI List may include sites which fulfil at least one of the three general criteria: - “are of importance for conserving the components of biological diversity in the Mediterranean; - contain ecosystems specific to the Mediterranean area or the habitats of endangered species;

9 Natural Reserves are defined by Law in Israel as “areas where animals, plants, soil, caves and water of scientific or educational interest are preserved from undesirable changes in their appearance, biological composition or development process”. 10 The National legislation describes National Parks as being “first and foremost intended for enjoyment of the visitor”.

- are of special interest at the scientific, aesthetic, cultural or educational levels. - Several of these general criteria can in certain cases be fulfilled by the same area, and such a circumstance cannot but strengthen the case for the inclusion of the area in the List ». The RHAMR complies with at least two of these criteria, and would also comply with the detailed selection criteria mentioned in other Articles of the Annex I to the Protocol: - « The Parties ensure that sites included in the List are provided with adequate legal status, protection measures and management methods and means. - The conservation of the natural heritage is the basic aim that must characterize a SPAMI. The pursuit of other aims such as the conservation of the cultural heritage, and the promotion of scientific research, education, participation, collaboration, is highly desirable in SPAMIs and constitutes a factor in favour of a site being included on the List, to the extent in which it remains compatible with the aims of conservation. - The regional value is a basic requirement of an area for being included in the SPAMI List ». The following criteria are proposed in the Protocol in evaluating the Mediterranean interest of an area: uniqueness, natural representativeness, diversity, naturalness, presence of habitats that are critical to endangered, threatened or endemic species, and cultural representativeness. The RHAMR can fulfil most of these criteria. - Other characteristics and factors should be considered as favourable for the inclusion of the site in the List. These include: the involvement and active participation of the public in general, and particularly of local communities, in the process of planning and management of the area; the existence of a body representing the public, professional, non-governmental sectors and the scientific community involved in the area; the existence in the area of opportunities for sustainable development; and the existence of an integrated coastal management plan within the meaning of Article 4 paragraph 3 (e) of the Convention. Again, the RHAMR may fulfil these criteria. Transboundary? Most relevant for the RHAMR case is the possiblity of being expanded in the expected future of peace with Lebanon as a transboundary Mediterranean SPAMI. Article 9.2. in the Protocol foresee and encourage this ecologically sound (and politically attractive) possibility when considering that “Proposals for inclusion in the SPAMI List may be submitted by the Party concerned, if the area is situated in a zone already delimited, over which it exercises sovereignty or jurisdiction; or by the neighbouring Parties concerned... (even in) areas where the limits of national sovereignty or jurisdiction have not yet been defined”.


Map 5b: Proposed Protected Area

3.4. Legal background At present there are a number of existing legal tools in application that directly support the conservation objectives of the new RHAMR: • Laws for Rosh Haniqra and Akhziv National Parks • Law for the protection of marine flora and fauna up to 1 km in the sea • Law by which the two islets groups and 100 m around are integrally protected. Other legal frameworks offer indirect support to the conservation of the RHAMR: - The Coastal Law, establishing 100 m without building (but will not affect plans done before the Law was issued, as those in the Bezet area) - Law for “Marinas”, restricting their number to 14 in all the country, none of them in the Nahariyya-Rosh Haniqra area. - A new law in Israel is impeding spearfishing with scuba equipment. - The Environmental Quality Standards for the Mediterranean Sea in Israel, established by the Ministry of the Environment (2002). Other national regulatory frameworks may constitute a matter of concern to the Reserve objectives, e.g. the existing Law allowing trawling fisheries from the depth of only 15 m, or the land-use Master Plan (2000) of the Matte Asher municipality, which includes provision of land for building (c.a. 300 apartments) behing Bezet beach (Map 2). Israel ratified the SPA Protocol of the Barcelona Convention in 28/10/1987, and proposed Rosh Haniqra as a Specially Protected Area because of its important coastal and marine habitats and favorable conservation status. Today, the RHAMR as a whole should be awarded a legal status guaranteeing its effective long term protection.

This is in any case an obligation for any international recognition (e.g. to be eligible for inclusion in the SPAMI List). Israel should provide the legal opportunities to ensure authority for adequate regulations in order that activities can be controlled or as necessary prohibited, and adequate legal provisions taken to enforce powers and duties, such as penalties, adequate powers to the Park staff to take effective enforcement, and if necessary, opportunities for compensation for lost resource-use rights. Following the national legal category of “Natural Reserve”, the regulations specific to each Reserve may prohibit any activity there in, prohibit or limit access and, with the agreement of the Ministry of Transport, prohibit or limit the entry of vehicles, boats and airplanes. The UNCLOS (UN Convention on the Law of the Sea), Art.194:5 provides that measures taken by the States to protect their marine environment shall include “those necessary to protect and preserve rare or fragile ecosystems as well as the habitat of depleted, thereatened or endangered species and other forms of marine life”.

Map 5a: Proponed Protected Area


3.5. Objectives of the Management plan The Nature and Parks Authority (NPA) shall adopt any measures deemed necessary for the planning, management, supervision and monitoring of the RHAMR. Building on the existing legal instruments11, the Reserve will be endowed with a Management Plan for its marine extension. The main objective of the Management Plan would be to enable the RHAMR to conserve its unique natural features while ensuring its visitors enjoyment and awareness, avoiding any conflicts between users and nature resources, and complying with the most demanding international provisions on protected area management. The Management Plan specifies the legal and institutional framework and the management and protection measures applicable, searching for a balance between competitive uses and trying to reconcile any conflicting interests, fairly and evenly representing the stakeholder’s viewpoints. The Management Plan should follow the legal provisions established at the creation of the RHAMR -including those of the existing National Parks- and will cover the most demanding criteria in anticipation of a possible international declaration. At the same time it should be realistic in terms of applicability in the local and national context, capacities and possibilities. It will search for a common vision within involved authorities and primary stakeholders. It will analyse means for possible co-management practices, covering not only good relations with the local organisations but also their possible active involvement in the planning and management.

11 Which should be explictly mentioned in the Law that will create the new RHAMR

Management Plans are strategic, evolving and adaptive tools, setting the core management priorities, regulations and criteria, and providing for monitoring, evaluation and regular revision and adaptation to changing situations. Management Plans are not written in stone, and do not aim at the mathematical solving of problems, in the understanding that the management of a territory is not certain law, as it depends on daily decissions in contact with natural elements and with users. The Management Plan will fulfil 3 complementary and mutually reinforcing functions:

• Biodiversity Conservation - to contribute

to the conservation of native landscapes, ecosystems, habitats, species and genetic diversity;

• Institutional, administrative and management - to provide guidance and support for protection, research, monitoring, education and information, training and Park’s administration and financing;

• Local involvement and development - to encourage, where necessary, co-management practices to the extent that local participation in conservation and public use are necessary or desirable to ensure the long term finance and protection of the Reserve and its immediate buffer areas.


IV. CONSERVATION PROPOSAL 4.1. Zoning principles Zoning the RHAMR will be based on the protection of critical or important habitat and conditions for selected species (mainly those in Annex II to the Protocol) or for the protection of particularly good examples of habitat types with the associated genetic diversity in its communities. When possible –as it is the case in RHAMR- zoning and other aspects of the management plan should also consider the coastal area, to avoid discrepancy with the primary conservation objectives. Zoning must allow human uses being compatible with the primary goal of conservation. Establishing different zones allows to separate conflicting conservation needs and human demands. According to the Reserve Objectives, the main human activities in the RHAMR would be: scientific research, recreation, environmental education, and monitoring. The following Zoning criteria are considered (see Salm and Clark 1999; Davey 1998), and the Annex I to the V Protocol to the Barcelona Convention): Natural factors 12: o Representativeness: of ecological processes, habitat types, communities and species o Naturalness: low level of human disturbance o Vulnerability: susceptible to degradation by natural or human induced events and actions o Restorability: interest and possiblities for restoration of degraded habitats and species’ populations o Productivity: spill effect for commercial fisheries. Human related factors 13:

12 Other ecological criteria as Uniqueness, Integrity (an effective self-sustaining ecological entity), Dependency (from biotically structured systems (eg coral reefs, marine meadows), and even Diversity, are criteria that may not apply to a small area as the RHAMR) 13 Other human related criteria such as Economic benefit (importance to utilization of living marine resources) or Human dependency (support to traditional uses or needs) are not considered given the unsignificant economical value and social demand in relation to its ecological importance.

o Recreation: special significance for visitation and tourism o Accessibility, Representativeness, ease of control, lower o Research: high scientific interest or as baseline monitoring regarding the biota or the environmental charateristics o Education: opportunity to demonstrate particular natural phenomena o Historic value: zones with a historical and archaeological significance We have chosen to use spatial multiple-criteria analysis (e.g. see Villa et al 2002 for the same exercise in Italy) for determining the suitability of both the marine and immediate coastal areas for different uses and levels of protection. The cartographic exercise combines the spatial information layers prevoiusly presented as Natural Values (Map 1), existing land use and Master plans (Map 2), protected areas and infrastructure (Map 3) and sources of impact (Map 4). 4.2. Zoning Options We recommend two zone categories (one of them sub-divided in two), and present here three options, intended for internal discussion, as shown in Maps 6a, 6b, and 6c. These three zoning options may also be combined with the 2 options presented as general reserve boundaries (Maps 5a and 5b), totaling 6 possible options. In order to avoid an unecessary proliferation of maps in this document, we have built only three examples: • Map 6a: Boundaries 5a with zoning option a) • Map 6b: Boundaries 5a with zoning option b) • Map 6c: Boundaries 5b with zoning option c) a) Core zone (or Integral, or Scientific zone): - Objective: To ensure the long term protection of the RHAMR ecological processes and biodiversity. - Core Zone Delimitation: The core area should be enlarged as possible in order to ensure the maximum representativeness, ecological resilience, and buffer to any direct (e.g. fisheries) or indirect (e.g. recreation or pollution) human

PROPOSED ZONING


caused impacts. It is recommended that at least three-quarters and preferably more of the area should be managed for the primary purpose, conservation; while the management of the remaining area must not be in conflict with that primary purpose. Three options are presented ahead. - Main regulations: Strict no extraction zone. No modification or disturbance should be allowed on the abiotic resources, habitats or any biota. No entry allowed either, except NPA personnel and other specially authorised personnel given access for maintenance and navigation (e.g. passage of authorised visitor’s boats to visit the RH grottos, non-disturbing, no anchoring); the core area may also provide appropriate grounds for non-extractive scientific research and monitoring, or for controlled activities aiming at the recuperation of degraded habitats or protected species populations. b) Buffer zone (or Public Use zone): - Objective: To serve as a buffer zone for the core RHAMR, by protecting and restoring its biodiversity and natural and cultural resources, serving as the area to develop the necessary maintenance and NPA logistics, being open to the public for controlled recreational and educational activities, and for environmental and cultural interpretation, while offering financial opportunities for the RHAMR management and creation of local businesses and employement. - Delimitation: Including all the existing protected areas in land, plus a water corridor for public use of c.a. 800 m starting in Bezet beach. See options ahead and in Maps 6a, 6b and 6c). - Main regulations and activities: This is a no-take zone -except for scientific research and, temporally, rod fishing. Entrance of public would be allowed under specific regulations (see ahead). c) Marine Zoning Options - Option A (Map 6a): the Core Zone (1.862 ha fully marine) covers the 3,7 Km wide marine extension all the way to the southern border of the Reserve, and includes the whole Kurkar ridge and all the islets. The marine buffer (498 ha) is c.a. 800-1000 m wide starting in Bezet beach and all the way to the south. This Option A choice is best for conservation purposes but may present some management difficulties:

o Scuba diving should be done away from the main Kurkar ridge and islets o It could be contested by trawler fishermen. However, trawlers may find a benefit because enlarging the border-effect of the marine reserve increases the fish biomass spill-over.

- Option B (Map 6b), the Core Zone (1.118 ha marine) keeps the 3,7 Km boundary in the sea, reaching southwards to 3 Km -taking advantage of the existing border security area which is readily

accepted by all users- in order to include the head of the underwater canyon. To maximise this Core Zone, it would be expanded to just 300 m in front of Bezet beach, thus avoiding the passage of motor boats, while the protected area around the southern islets should be enlarged to 200m. On its side, the Buffer Zone (1.244 ha marine) is wide and allows sailing and diving, but no trawling. - Option C (Map 6c): Following the criteria of “ease of control” and “clear boundaries in the field”, in this choice all the Reserve would be considered as a Buffer (2.477 ha) except for 112 ha in 200m circles around the islets, which would be the only marine Core Zone. This option may work in terms of biodiversity conservation if fishing is prohibited and pollution are stopped. However, it presents some drawbacks:

o It requieres a strict control of all recreational activities in the sea; o An exception should be done in order to include into this enlarged “Extensive Zone” the two small integral reserves protecting the islets, which in this case should be enlarged to 200 m; o It takes no advantage of the existing social acceptance of the security area of 2.5 Km without presence of fishermen and visitors.

In this Map 6c, as a matter of example, we have chosen to use the option B) for the general reserve boundaries, that is, leaving outside the reserve the beaches which today are not under the NPA. d) Two sub-zones in the Buffer Zone Experience shows the difficulties to turn a massive visitation area into a selective one. The coastal area, limited by two attractive National Parks at each side, is prone to massive visitation; however, the marine area may be a selective visitation site. The Buffer zone should be divided into 2 sub-zones considering the intensity of uses allowed. The criteria used for this selection are: accesibility, representativeness, ease of control, lower ecological impact, demand/expectations from visitors and locals, and borders easy to recognise in the field.


Two zones are proposed:

o An Intensive Use zone (91 ha, only on land) including the areas which today receive most visitation, and which are under old concessions of use and exploitation, such as the two existing National Parks and the Bezet beach. It is a service area including parking, Marine Visitors Centre, other recreation and servicing activities requiring infrastructures, facilities or equipment (see Section 5.1. and Map 7 for details). o An Extensive Use zone includes all the marine buffer zone, including on land the existing Nature Reserves on the beach. Low impact visitation allowed (self guided walks on trails, educational activities, swimming, snorkeling, diving, sailing). No building and no camping on land. It is a strict no take-zone on land and sea, except for extractive scientific research and recreational, regulated rod-fishing (only in the southern portion), because the northern part of this beach Nature Reserve (north of Bezet) being contiguous to the marine Core Zone, should not allow rod fishing.

To maximise the beach and marine turtle protection, the southern portion of the existing beach Nature Reserve could be enlarged as shown in Maps 5a, 6a and 6b, that is, northwards up to the turtle breeding site and southwards to reach the Akhziv National Park border. With this enlargement the Extensive Use zone would cover 38 ha on land. This does not necessarily mean the beach would be fenced, but that protection measures would be applied to its use.

TABLE 6: PROPOSED REGULATIONS

CORE EXTENSIVE INTENSIVE ACTIVITY ACTION 1763 ha 533 ha Only on land Aquaculture or any other industries P P P Commercial activities P P C-NPA

Economic Commercial or sport fishing P P P Rod fishing P Lim Lim Extractive research, scientific collection P A-NPA A-NPA

Extractive

Free motor boating P Lim n.a. Sailing Lim Free n.a. Anchoring P Lim n.a. Mooring facility P P Lim

Recreational nautic

Launching n.a. P Lim Swimming and snorkeling P Free n.a. Scuba diving P A-NPA n.a. Camping facility n.a. n.a. C-NPA Free camping n.a. P P Walking n.a. Free Free Disturbance or collection of wild organisms or parts of them P P P Tipping rubish; unnecessary noise P P P Fires, lights, dogs or free pets P P Lim

Public visitation

Parking and beach access n.a. Lim Lim Public visitation allowance P Free Free Recreational facilities P P C-NPA Guided motor-boat tours A-NPA A-NPA n.a. Educational facilities P A-NPA A-NPA Interpretation activities P A-NPA A-NPA Non-extractive research A-NPA A-NPA A-NPA

Management

Introduction of aloctonous species P P P Free: Free without authorisation A-NPA: Requieres previous NPA authorisation C-NPA: Requieres Agreement or Concession with NPA P: Prohibited Lim: Subject to specific limitations (e.g. boats limited by number, type, speed or distance)

n.a. non-applicant


4.3. Protection measures and regulations The RHAMR will be subject to the following regulations, some of them applying to the whole Reserve, while others are specific to each of the proposed zones (see Table 6). a) General Protection measures and regulations applying to the whole Reserve Being a SPA in the Barcelona Convention, the following protection measures (Art.6 to the Protocol) should be binding to the RHAMR:

a. The strengthening of the application of the other Protocols to the Convention and of other relevant treaties to which they are Parties; b. The prohibition of the dumping or discharge of wastes and other substances likely directly or indirectly to impair the integrity of the specially protected area; c. the regulation of the passage of ships and any stopping or anchoring; d. the regulation of the introduction of any species not indigenous to the specially protected area in question, or of genetically modified species, as well as the introduction or reintroduction of species which are or have been present in the specially protected area; e. the regulation or prohibition of any activity involving the exploration or modification of the soil or the exploitation of the subsoil of the land part, the seabed or its subsoil; f. the regulation of any scientific research activity; g. the regulation or prohibition of fishing, hunting, taking of animals and harvesting of plants or their destruction, as well as trade in animals, parts of animals, plants, parts of plants, which originate in Specially Protected Areas; h. the regulation and if necessary the prohibition of any other activity or act likely to harm or disturb the species or that might endanger the state of conservation of the ecosystems or species or might impair the natural or cultural characteristics of the specially protected area; i. Any other measure aimed at safeguarding ecological and biological processes and the landscape. - And any other depending on existing laws, national or local, and international treaties subscribed by the State of Israel. b) Specific regulations for each zone (Table 6) (NOTE: Intensive Use zone is only on land)

4.4. Management bodies and responsibilities The competence and responsibility for administration and for conservation measures in the new RHAMR must be clearly defined in the texts governing the area. It also needs a management body endowed with sufficient powers, means and human resources to prevent

and control activities likely to be contrary to the aims of the protected area 14. Decision level: It is strongly recommended that all protected areas under the RHAMR (including the National Parks) respond to the same Authority and are managed by one only Director on both land and sea portions. The NPA will be ultimately responsible to warrant the protection of the RHAMR but may, following the national legal provisions and if deemed necessary at the local level, coordinate in an interinstitutional body, where the NPA should provide leadership, incentives, and resources.

Collaborative level:

Participation does not substitute the decision-making process, but helps making it and contribute to its success. The management of the RHAMR will try to reconcile any conflicting interests, fairly and evenly representing the stakeholder’s viewpoints. This is of particular interest for decision making and to search for collaboration when implementing the field programs and services. One way is by co-management practices, sharing some responsibilities. Other ways of bringing interested parties and local people into management are by conceding an advisory role, or by granting compensations through opportunities for education, businesses and local employment. Potential participants (or stakeholders) will be considered within those individuals and organisations that have an active role or interest i In the area -those likely to have a legitimate interest or be affected by the outcomes. The number of key participants will be kept into a realistic minimum while their quality to a maximum. In their selection the following criteria may apply:

• Primary or responsible stakeholders: Organisations empowered by law with authority and responsibility to manage land, sea or resources (may include those claiming over resources), e.g. the Army or Mate Asher local government.

• Secondary or beneficiary stakeholders: Who have an indirect interest in the outcome and may need to be involved regularly. E.g. the Tourism Association, the service concessions (such as RH Qibutz, diving clubs and other), Universities or research institutions, and NGOs (as SPNI).

14 All these needs are criteria for possible inclusion in the SPAMI List (SPA Protocol, Annex 1, Articles D4 and D6)


Participation bodies 1. The primary institutions may coordinate with

NPA through a Steering Committee or Council, with the following objectives:

• The enforcement of the RHAMR objectives and respect to rules,

• Coordinate their support to the RHAMR objectives and activities,

• Warrant the needed institutional support

Each member in the Committee would provide support to the RHAMR in the measure of its institutional own mandate and resource possibilities. The Committee should meet at least once a year to review strategic and planning decisions, which should be taken by consensus. 2. A wider Advisory Council, including

secondary stakeholders could play an advisory role to the RHAMR Director. Individual members of this Committee may contribute into the appropriate management programmes, permanently or temporally, e.g. through specific thematic groups. The existence of a body representing the public, professional, non-governmental sectors and the scientific community involved in the area is an official criteria for the selection of a candidate area to the SPAMI List.

Depending on the Law and the culture in each country, participation can also be an informal process. Actually, experience shows that advisory or participatory committees are very seldom officialised. However, it is more effective when a structure is formalised and receives a mandate and responsibilities (e.g. see Salm and Clarke 1999; Johns 2001). In some countries participatory bodies may even have a binding mandate over some management decisions. A possible organic arrangement could be the following: The RHAMR Director:

The RHAMR Director: One only person for both the marine and land parts of the RHAMR should be responsible for the implementation of the Management Plan, the preparation of action programmes and annual plans for approval by the NPA (and the Steering Committee) and for their implementation; responsible for the coordination of the staff, the finances and administration, and the public representation of the RHAMR, and for calling and chairing the regular meetings of the Advisory Council. The Reserve Director must be fully supported by the NPA and the Steering Committee and needs a full time involvement in RHAMR. It is advisable that he/she has an specialization in marine ecology, and professional diving skills. Initially he/she would be supported by an Administrative unit and two specialized technicians (for Public Use and for Conservation) whose possible tasks are described ahead (the latter may be avoided at the beginning).

NPA Institutional Coordination body

Advisory Council (or Thematic groups)

RHARM Director (NPA)

Administration

Conservation Public Use


V. MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES

5.1. Administration and Surveillance a) Administrative recommendations The NPA would set the appropriate policies for entrance fees and other fund-raising and control mechanisms, and establish procedures and criteria for concessions, conditioned agreements or permits for any services or uses inside the RHAMR.

A RHAMR Administrative Unit, under mandate of the Reserve Director, would take care of staff, surveillance mechanisms, preparation and issuing of contracts, concessions and permits, while supporting all the RHAMR logistics, fees policies and fund-raising activities.

• Scuba diving, cruising trips, guided trails (snorkeling and walking)

• Beach services and facilities (restaurants, disco, toilets, showers, changing rooms, boat rental, etc.) and boating-related facilities

• Camping site and parking lots (if included inside the reserve boundaries, e.g. in option 5a)

• Marine Visitor Center and Information Points.

The NPA should give priority to those applications which provide some environmental education content in proposed activities and include trained personnel. The NPA may design a protocol for granting concessions and authorizations, for which the following conditions are recommended:

- Concessionaires should be committed to obey all regulations established in the Management Plan and provide evidence of competence to manage the facility or service along with an exploitation planning.

- Concessionaires must inform their visitor clients on regulations and on the main natural values of the RHAMR likely to be affected by their activity.

- Once a year the concessionaires should submit a memory summarizing activities developed including, at least,

data on intensity of use (number of visitors and frequency of the activity per month), visitors perception and any relevant

environmental and social issues and consequences of their activity.

- Concessions or authorizations should be reviewed on a yearly basis. Concessionaires will loose the authorization or concession it they fail to accomplish the established conditions.

b) Surveillance recommendations In limiting the number of visitors, two mechanisms are recommended:

• Access control (see Jimenez 2000), and • Pricing, as the second and

complementary best control choice. Land access

Must be controlled as mentioned in

Sections 4.3. (Zoning) and 5.3. (Public Use). Completely closing the beach road or either permitting just one entrance (south) with an entrance fee for cars would be a choice, while advertising and facilitating the access to the beach through marked corridors. This proposal would need at least 2 addittional NPA guards, and another in the high season (a guard at the northern side of the beach road) who may be provided by the RH Qibutz or as volunteers. Most land-staff needs are detailed in 5.3.

Marine surveillance

Additionaly, six months a year the new

RHAMR may need a boat and two guards trained on conservation and monitoring issues, and with diving skills- preferably professional. These guards should also contribute to monitoring activities in collaboration with scientists. They should be responsible for maintaining the diving and transport equipments and materials in the best condition of use, and be trained on first aid and emergencies.

Marine surveillance is usually expensive.

Today it is facilitated by the presence of the army


routine at the border; however this may change in the future. Experience in other Mediterranean marine protected areas recommends as the most efficient and less costy:

• Informing all potential users • Concessioners will be responsible for visitor’ compliance with regulations • Marking the area: one signal bouy in the SW corner may be enough (although expensive -e.g. 7000 U$- and needs maintenance). • Making use of as much automatic devices as possible, such as infrared and automatic cameras. • Establishing artificial reefs to prevent trawlers (however, these reefs are also expensive, may sink in sandy bottoms, and may not be necessary if the area is surveyed during the day by NPA -and the Army at night).

Establishing constructive relations with interest groups and local communities strongly facilitates surveillance and prevents possible conservation conflicts. One way is to foresee specific compensations for lost resource-use rights (eg. with fishermen or tourism services), although this seems not necessary in RHAMR. However, experience recommends that in case necessary it may be considered:

• Establishing a traditional fishing reserve to compensate the local small fishermen (e.g. non-trawling, non-drift-net between Akko and Nahariyya)

• Considering some ex-fishermen as fishing guards or visitor’s guides.

5.2. Conservation, research and Monitoring In contrast with the two previous management programmes (Administration-Surveillance and Public Use-Education) this management programme would be developed by a marine ecology specialist (who may be the same Director of the Reserve) in charge of supervising and controlling any activity deemed risky for the integrity of populations, habitats or ecosystem functions, and in charge of any natural resource management and of coordinating the scientific research and the regular monitoring and evaluation of the RHAMR management. Generating knowledge through scientific research is one of the main objectives of the Marine Reserve. Being the first MPA in the Mediterranean Sea of Israel, it should provide opportunities for national research centres and Universities to develop long term marine research programmes. Any research should follow particular agreements with NPA and authorization for the collection of specimens or parts of them. Research plots allowing the extraction of specimens should be restricted to the buffer area, but non-extraction plots would be better placed in the core zone, where long-term natural conditions are guaranteed. The number of research topics is very high; a priority should be given to those providing:

• Increased knowledge of the biology and ecology of marine species and ecosystem, and complete marine inventory and species distribution;

• Economic values of the new reserve and its resources, such as the spill-over effect for fisheries, or its economic valuation after new zoning, accesses, regulations and tourism services are in place.

• Improved management of the marine reserve, e.g., monitoring of key indicators (see ahead), the water quality (National Institute of

Oceanography), or the impact from rod fisheries.

Aquaculture facilities would be forbidden, and given the relatively small size of the marine reserve no commercial fishing would be allowed either 15. Only rod fishing may be allowed in the southern portion of the reserve meanwhile detailed studies demonstrate its possible impact on fish communities. Scuba fishing is prohibited. Illegal trawling can be controlled by establishing artifical reefs 16, but with a minimum weight of 8 tons these are expensive and risk to be buried in a few years in the sandy bottoms under the high energy hidrodynamics of Rosh Haniqra.

Monitoring & Evaluation

Management Plans should provide for surveillance of use and changes in order to:

• determine the condition of the managed ecosystem and its resources,

• for scientific research purposes, • to know the extent to which users

adhere to the provisions of management,

• and to assisst in the evaluation of management and the eventual correction of management programmes and tools.

Monitoring in the broad sense refers to repeated measurements taken at the same site, on the same subject, over a specified period of time (Nobel & Norton, 1991) (Baker 2000). The results of monitoring allow knowing in which direction we are moving, and will feed the

15 In other Mediterranean areas, such as the Cabo de Gata in Spain, any catch over 15 kg from a boat or over 2 kg from the coast is considered commercial. 16 If ever used, artificial reefs should have a mixed objective: a) count with anti-trawling structures, while b) having a fish concentration design.


management decisions and a regular revision of the Management Plan itself. Monitoring not only allows managers to know when standards have been violated, but it can also give early warnings of potential problems and negative trends, suggesting management actions 17. The importance of monitoring has led to the inclusion of specific articles in the Barcelona Convention (see Box 2): BOX 2 Art. 3 (General obligations) .5: “The Parties shall monitor the component of biological diversity referred to in paragraph 3 of this article and shall identify processes and categories of activities which have or are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, and monitor their effects”. Annex I-D8: the Parties agree: “To be included in the SPAMI List, an area will have to be endowed with a monitoring programme. This programme should include the identification and monitoring of a certain number of significant parameters for the area in question, in order to allow the assessment of the state and evolution of the area, as well as the effectiveness and protection and management measures implemented, so that they may be adapted if need be”.

Carrying capacity Monitoring also allows to estimate the Carrying Capacity. This might be important not only for management purposes but to avoid preassure from tourism businesses who traditionally ask for higher number of visitors. However, it is very difficult to estimate a simple number, as the carrying capacity (CC) depends on changing physical, biological, social, cultural and management factors. And it can only be estimated taking into account non perceived impacts, including the behaviour, the perceptions and the expectations from visitors. The CC must be calculated for each site (e.g. a beach, a rocky point, a trail, a diving site), but the total CC would not be the simple adding of these, as the possibility of rotating visitors within sites is only theoretical while the Park’s capacity to control or survey all these sites at a given moment is limited because of staff, service and equipment shortages. The information given to visitors and their behaviour is also a crucial factor in CC. The theoretical estimation of the CC (Cifuentes 1992) starts with the physical CC, the number of visitors that can possible fit in a site without causing physical erosion (e.g. 100); this number is corrected by the number of visitors that can move to other sites through trails or other means, and the number fitting the next site (eg. 65). This number is possibly reduced again by the

biological impact that they may cause in e.g. bird colonies, animal presence, and perhaps again corrected in light of seasonal changes (e.g. 45 would be the highest number of visitors which can be moved around without causing physical or biological impact). It comes now to correct this number again by investigating the perceptions from visitors; usually, visitors to a protected area expect a quality experience, and quests worlwide (Stankey et al 1985) show that they prefer groups smaller than 8 people, and wish not to encounter with other groups. This new CC, called social CC, would reduce again the number of visitors that would not cause ecological impact, while having a quality experience. But finally, this number has to be cheked against the Park’s capacity to survey visitors, to guide, inform, collect garbage, or provide other services, reducing the possible CC once again. Finally, this CC is always dependant on a basic factor : the visitor’s behaviour, which can in turn be influenced by the information and sensibiliization they receive from the Publci Use Programme. More information on CC calculation and discussion can be found in

17 However, in a worldwide assessment of MPA management effectiveness, Kelleher et al. (1995) found that 925 out of 1,303 (71%) marine protected areas had no available management effectiveness information. This figure decreases to 49% in the Mediterranean region (Lopez Ornat 1997).

Shelby and Heberlein (1986), Clark (1991) and Pritchard (1992).

The complexity of this methods has driven park managers to use the more flexible approach known as « Limits of Acceptable Change » (LAC) (Stankey et al 1985). It consists on allowing a given number of visitors and monitoring their impact in order to adjust, through daily practice, our management measures and the number of visitors allowed at each site. The LAC process seeks to address the questions: given recreational use, what are the acceptable biophysical and social conditions in our protected area? And, what are the appropriate and effective actions to maintain those conditions? The standards reached should reflect the acceptable conditions, not necessarily those that are the best desirable, that is, the minimally acceptable conditions. What degree of change from the natural conditions are we willing to tolerate? Any violation of the standards would require an immediate management action.

In the RHARM it would be advisable to start with the present number of visitors (e.g. 200.000) and monitor their impact (physical and biological), their perceptions, and our own management capacity, using a series of indicators, some of which are proposed ahead. What to monitor? Monitoring must rely on data from a series of quantifiable parameters, the list of which is always long, so it should be restricted to a few significant indicators showing the complience with the Reserve objectives: Conservation and Public Use. Indicators should, as possible, be synthetic, reliable, comparable, and easily obtained. Indicators related to conservation objectives should show the reserve effect:


• Indicator marine Species: 1. Fishes: visual censuses for the size and

density of large Serranids (Epinephelus or Mycteroperca) or large Sparrids (Diplodus or Dentes) 18 (Goren and Galil 2004; Ramos et al. 2004), through random surveys. An example is described in Annex 2.

2. Dendropoma petraeum: square meters of living colonies (Ramos op.cit; Goren and Galil op.cit.).

3. Patella spp. (all species) are cought for bait by fishermen and as food for Thai immigrants; these organisms are easy to count on the rocky shore.

4. Pinna spp. and Axinella spp. are fragile benthic species that may indicate trawling activities or careless diving. Direct sampling needs deep scuba-diving, by both by linear transects and sample areas (10 m radium), usually working two divers together. An example for the rare Pinna nobilis is described in Annex 2.

5. Actinia cari, and Anemonia sulcata are both easy to count (Galil com.pers; Ramos com.pers), and interesting indicators of water pollution.

6. Marine turtles (2 spp): number of nests. Number of hatchlings and reproductive success ratio, as already being done by the NPA.

• Indicators for marine Habitats 7. Ulva sp. or Cystoceira compressa algae.

Percentage of cover both in summer and winter on the same plots (Ramos op.cit; Goren and Galil op.cit.), located at different distances of the sewage effluents, plus in a control sample in nearby unpolluted waters.

8. Ocypode cursor crab as indiactor of beach overuse (Galil com.pers.); it digs holes on the sand, allowing density and size be easily estimated by number and diameter.

9. Water quality: taking advantage of the regular monitoring of heavy metals, nutrients and microbial components, developed by the Ministry of Environment or the National Institute of Oceanography.

Indicators regarding public use may be (see examples in Annex 2):

10. Visitor profile: number, sex, how and from where they arrive, how long they stay, maximum day of annual visitation.

18 Other fish species such as Parablennius zvonimiri and P.sanguinolentus are not fished and do not serve as good indicators of the reserve effect as the Serranids and Sparrids. Invertebrates with a fishing interest such as the lobster Scilandes lattus (territorial and feed on invertebrates) or the Octopus vulgaris are difficult to survey.

11. Activities: number of visitors per activity and per month, particularly number of daily dives, number of divers, and number of daily cruising trips and users.

12. Quests on visitors’ satisfaction with: quality/prices/safety.

13. Press: Media releases are excellent indicators of wider public opinion, acceptance and conflicts.

When to monitor? Ideally, monitoring should be a regular activity and begin with the implementation of the Management Plan. Some indicators should be measured continuously, such as the visitor’s flow, weather, infrecuent episodes. The species indicators should be monitored every one to three years. The monitoring of habitats can take place episodically, e.g. every 3 or 5 years. Table 7 suggests the frecuency for the main measurements. Who monitors? The NPA staff would be in charge of monitoring, but depending on the indicator concerned other stakeholders should also contribute, in order not to duplicate efforts and capacities from professionals and institutions already existing in the area. Participatory monitoring also allows to share conservation responsibilities and keep coherence for the long term objective of the Marine Reserve. Researchers from universities, and post-graduate students may care about the most complex indicators; external experts may research, e.g., about the changing (probably improving) economical values of the Marine Reserve. Tourism businesses and concessioners must contribute with visitor’s numbers, profiles and activities. NGOs under coordination of NPA can volunteer with field surveys for species or habitats, or through quests to visitors. Every year the monitoring results could be distributed to all participants and stakeholders, and even displayed in offices or in public media in order to inform about the trends and needs of the protection of the marine resources. See Annex 2 for examples on monitoring of indicators relevant to the case of Rosh Haniqra Marine Reserve.

(G.Vilar)

Coastal platform with Dendropoma

(G.Vilar)MONITORING

(Univ. Alicante)

(G.Vilar)

(Univ. Alicante)

Cable Car in RH

Ocipode cursor crab hole

Trawling indicator: Pinna Nobilis

(Univ. Alicante)

(Univ. Alicante)

Pollution indicator: Actinia sp

(NPA)

C.careta turtle nestling

Trawling indicator: Axinella sp

Pollution Indicator:Ulva or Cistoceira algae covering Dendropoma


RESERVE OBJECTIVE

THREAT IMPACT INDICATOR MEASSURE TECHNIQUE WHEN WHO REMARKS

Vehicle and foot preassure

Ocypode cursor Holes on sand Count number and diameter

Twice a year NPA staff and volunteers Beach overuse Lights Marine turtles Breeding success Nest translocation Every season NPA staff and volunteers Already being

done Fishing (all types)

Large fishpopulations

Large Serranids or Sparrids

Size / density Visual census Every 3 years Universities or NPA staff Requires diving. See Annex 2

Rod Fishing Bait gathering Patella sp. Size / density Visual census Every year NPA staff and volunteers Trawling

Harm benthiccommunities

Pinna spp. or Axinella spp.

Size / density Transects or 10m circles

Every 3 years Universities / diving clubs Requires deep diving. See Annex 2

Death of Vermetid reef

Dendropoma M2 of living colonies

Visual estimation Every year NPA staff and volunteers Organic pollution

Death of Vermetid reef

Ulva sp. or Cystoceira sp.

% cover Visual estimation Summer and winter

NPA staff and volunteers

Harm sesile species Actinia cari or Anemona sulcata

Density Counts on fixedplots

Every 3 to 5 years Universities / diving clubs / NPA staff

Requires diving

C

ON

SERV

ATIO

N

Water pollution Pollution and health Heavy metals and

microbial Every 3 years Min.of Environment /

Nat.Inst.Oceanography

Visitor preasure Overcrowding

and garbage Frecuentation Number, origin

etc (see text) Count at services

and entrance Every day / or regular sampling

NPA staff with Public Use concessionaries

See text or Annex 2

Diving preassure

Marine species Frecuentation Number of dives / divers

Counts Daily records Diving clubs

Low qualityexperience

Visitors unsatisfied Visitor satisfaction...

...with quality,prices, safety

Quests, interviews Every 3 years NPA staff, diving clubs, volunteers

See Annex 2

PU

BLIC

USE

Conflicts with public

Public acceptance Press and radio releases

Count.... .... both positive and negative

Continuous NPA staff

TABLE 7 – SYNTHESIS OF INDICATORS FOR MONITORING CONSERVATION AND PUBLIC USE OBJECTIVES


5.3. Public Use and Education Programme

5.3.1. Introduction

The Public Use and Education Programme builds on already existing regulations, plans and services and is based on the management objectives established previously in Chapter III. It aims to ensure visitors to experience the unique natural, cultural, scenic and recreational values of the protected area by providing facilities for recreation, awareness and nature interpretation, adequate means for managing visitors, as well as promoting a safer recreation. Also communication activities (e.g. local radio or press releases) will help involving the local community in the sound management of public access and recreation, while raising local support.

5.3.2. Diagnosis of the present situation

a) Visitor’s profile

Visitors come from all around the country attracted most of them by Rosh Haniqra Natural Park, Akhziv National Park and the public beaches, and are more land-based recreation orientated than water-based. According to Becker et al. (2004), 212.000 users visit the grottos-based amenities of Rosh Haniqra National Park, 60.000 visitors spend time at Akhziv National Park where beach and water pools are the main attractions, and just 10.500 users choose to undertake scuba diving activities and cruising trips.

The main season for visitation lasts 5 months from May to September, the weekends being the busy days. Out of the swimming season the nature reserve is almost empty.

b) Existing visitors’ recreation demand

The uses under a higher demand are swimming, beach recreation, sailing, motor boating and jet-skiing, rod fishing, diving and cruising (see Map 3).

Beach recreation and swimming

During the summer season most visitors look for informal recreation on the coast, in the forms of swimming, picnic, sun bathing, walking, and other beach-based activities such as camping or through other related services like restaurants and discos. The areas supporting the highest intensity of use are the public beaches. According to Becker et al. (2004), at least 130.000 visitors enjoy beaches and swimming at Bezet beach, Akhziv beach (Banana`s beach) and Akhziv National Park. Nevertheless, this figure must be higher taking into account visitation in unauthorized beaches and under private access.

Nautical sports

Sailing activities such as windsurfing, kite-surf and dinghy sailing are the most popular nautical sports although the number of users is undetermined. It concentrates mainly around restricted areas which coincide with public beaches, at the southern half of the proposed RHAMR, being Bezet beach the most popular, due to free entry and because the field quarters of the only local sailing school are based at the back of that beach. Around Akhziv beach and Club Med beach sailing also takes place in a lower intensity probably because of due payment and private access respectively. Motor-boating cruising tours from the Phoenician harbor (at the south of Akhziv beach) to Rosh Haniqra National Park are quite popular with at least 200 users per day according to Trek Yam Club. This fact shows some interest from visitors to expend some time to discover natural features such as the grottos. Main private motor boats come from Nahariyya port facilities, while Jet skiing reach sea water through the launching point situated close to the Phoenician harbor. According to managers these uses have not reached a worrying intensity.

Recreational fishing

Recreational fishing is a traditional local use and the most popular activity all around the year, reaching up to 300 fishermen in a peak day, and mostly during summer and week-ends. Most of those recreational fishermen belong to the nearby communities and find in this activity a way for enjoyment and relax. Recreational fishing is practiced with a rod from the rocky shore where fishermen gather molluscs, like limpets, to be used as bait.

Diving

Today the largest number of scuba divers belong to groups in diving courses (100 per year), but more experienced divers have learned to enjoy the ridge (mainly 10-30 m deep), the underwater canyon (20 divers per week-end c/o Yazir Pozker), underwater caves (30-40 divers per week-end), wrecks or just willing to know the Mediterranean character making this spot different from the much more visited Gulf of Eliat in the Red Sea. Main recreational scuba diving takes place outside the existing marine protected belt but with the proposed RHAMR they will fall within the future boundaries. There is also demand for snorkeling. The main attraction are the fish, particularly grouper and Serranidae. There are no soft fan corals (Gorgonaceae) but the well developed Axinella sponges may constitute a biological attraction. However, turbidity is a problem,


particularly during the summer. The high seasons for diving are May-June and October. Scuba diving is undertaken both through diving clubs that bring divers by sea or coast to the diving sites, or on individual bases where divers rent the diving equipment and go diving by their own. It is important to highlight that despite spear fishing scuba diving is forbidden, it is practiced as a recreational activity. Visitors are attracted here for spearfishing, the number of which, depending on the information sources, are somewhere between 10% (diving clubs) and 90% (reserve rangers) of the total non-school scuba divers. Although the area can not be considered as a prime spot for diving, particularly as compared to Gulf of Eliat, the present demand will grow after the establishment of the marine reserve and after the foreseen improvement of the diving services –both facts have always attracted new visitors interested in diving.

c) Existing facilities and services for recreation

The main facilities and services for recreation are related with the public beach and National Park amenities, nautical sports and diving facilities and access and parking sites (see Map 3).

Beach and surrounding coastal zone services Facilities and services for swimming and beach recreation concentrate at public beaches which provide water quality control and emergency and rescue services along with other amenity opportunities. In Akhziv – Rosh Haniqra coastal area there are three public beaches and a private one (Club Med). Only Bezet beach is free entry, while the beaches in Akhziv National Park and Bananas charge a fee, and the private one is just for the Hotel clients. Most of these beaches offer several services for visitors such as restaurants, changing rooms, toilets, children playground, hammocks, free camping, parking lots and disco among other. Most of these areas provide facilities for private parties like weddings and even music concerts (case of Banana´s beach). Only Akhziv National Park beach is managed by the NPA while Bezet and Akhziv beach belong to the Regional County of Mate Asher and are managed by private concessionaires. Most of beach recreation facilities only run during the swimming season from about April to October, which is very related with tourism patterns. Some beach recreational sites have proposals to increase facilities, such as the Akhziv National Park project to build a ship-shaped restaurant. At present only a controlled picnic area is provided at this coast. It is placed in one of the few forest sites and provides shades and wooden tables and benches along with constructed

barbecues. It is located at the inland side of the beach road and it is managed by Keren Kayement L´Israel. Rosh Haniqra Natural Park offers the cavernous grottos formed by the sea action on the soft chalk cliff, with 200 meters in length, taking also advantage of the historical and cultural legacy and its border location. Main visitor facilities are the cablecars, 400 meters of footpath in cavern, an audio-visual display placed within the old tunnel, a restaurant, gift shop, toilets, parking facilities and a little train that brings visitors from the Lebanese-border tunnel for a trip along the coastal zone. Future plans include the expansion of parking lots.

Nautical sports and diving facilities and services

Tourism operators offering marine recreational activities are limited. There are two diving clubs operating in the marine area of Akhziv – Rosh Haniqra, Trek Yam diving club located nearby to the Akhziv National Park and other in Nahariyya. Both offer scuba diving trips and courses and cruising trips to Rosh Haniqra. At present none of them offer snorkeling services. Regarding nautical sports facilities, the only launching point is located in the small inlet adjacent to the Phoenician harbor which is provided with a concrete ramp as a slipway. Access is through a sandy trail delimited with a line of boulders. This boat ramp is mainly used by motor boating and jet-skiing crafts. Maintenance of this slipway appears to be needed as some delimiting boulders have been removed and litter was found around. Public beaches are also used as an informal launching point for windsurfing, small sailing craft and kite-surf boards as well as to keep the small catamarans and boards. At present there is no conflict between beach users but measures should be taken to avoid them in future. There are no water-based facilities such as mooring buoys or designated anchoring sites apart from the inlet where the boat ramp is placed, which is used for a few boats mooring in the nearby rocks during the summer season.

Access and parking facilities

Most access and parking lots are linked to the main recreational sites and facilities. These are located close to sea-sport hot spots and main services, near public beaches. Almost all visitors access the Akhziv – Rosh Haniqra coast by raod. The beach road was paved and opened around two years ago. Parking sites are one of the most demanded facilities. According to Guy Cohen up to 800 cars can be found at the same time along the Akhziv-Rosh Haniqra coastal area during the weekends. There are different car parking facilities along the beach road although the largest parking lots are close to the main visitor facilities at Banana´s beach, Bezet beach, Akhziv National Park and Rosh Haniqra National Park.

(G.Vilar)

Akhizv National Park

(G.Vilar)PUBLIC USE

(G.Vilar)

New trail to Rosh Haniqra

(G.Vilar)

(NPA)

Children releasing turtles

(WWF)

Diver and grouper

(G.Vilar)

Wind Surf in RH

(G.Vilar)

Terrace in RH grotto

Eli Avivi house-museum Akhziv


d) Information and education facilities and services

At present, there is an important lack of information and education facilities for visitors in terms of raising their understanding and awareness of marine and coastal nature values. Also the information about facilities and recreation opportunities is limited and scattered among different recreation sites. There is no Visitor Center19 or information point to provide information related to the existing protected areas, including natural and cultural values, regulation, services, activities and facilities. Environmental education initiatives are quite poor. The Society for Protection the Nature of Israel (SPNI) has a field school in the area which used to undertake education activities although today it is not working for this purposes on a regular basis. Nature interpretative activities such as guided footpath tours, or guided diving trails are not developed so far. There are three viewpoints located at the back coastal fringe of the north area of Akhziv – Rosh Haniqra coast together with a signed foot trail arriving to Rosh Haniqra. These facilities for nature observation and enjoyment would do their best with any nature interpretative display. Public awareness initiatives to increase environmental concerns of visitors are also scarce. The most remarkable activity runs during the summer season to make visitors aware of marine turtle fragility. It involves beach users in different actions like helping the hatchlings to reach the sea. The NPA also activates an emergency telephone number for visitors to inform about any issue regarding nesting turtles. Local operators and recreation sites represent a basic mean. For instance, Rosh Haniqra National Park receives a high number of visitors including school pupils. This fact should be exploited as a major marine environmental education opportunity. In terms of signals, major signs deal with welcome, general regulation and information about specific projects such as farms for nesting turtles, biotope research sites and launching facility. Some of them involve general information about the main natural features of the area. Format, content and location may be improved to make sure visitors pay attention to them. In some cases the signs location is not the most adequate and may even attract visitors across sensible habitats like the dune system. Despite wildlife richness in the area, visitors do not show much interest in discovering and enjoying nature in itself. The lack of information, communication and education programmes and services for visitors contribute to keep a low level of environmental interest and concern.

19 Such a center is planned in the Master Plan for Tourism Development of Mate Asher Coast (1995).

e) Existing and potential impacts

Impacts related to beach recreation and swimming

Uncontrolled access to the beach is a source of serious dune erosion and impact on gathering wild flowers such as Pancratium maritimum considered under threat by the UICN.

Many visitors come to Akchziv-Rosh Haniqra coast in a family basis to spend the day in the sandy beach and making it their camp site. Camping and barbecues all along the beaches leads to a big littering problem, damage to dune and beach vegetation and disturbing of turtle nesting sites. At present camping at turtle nesting sites is forbidden but apparently people still do, in spite the NPA and the Regional Council collaborate in cleaning up activities along all beaches and taking volunteers during the summer season. Despite authorized swimming areas reach up to 300 meters seaward, some swimmers reach the rocky islands disturbing seabirds. Other source of impact comes from those swimmers that collect marine wildlife from intertidal pools. On a yearly basis, the natural pools located at Akhziv N.P. are dredged in order to replenish the adjacent beach. This action should be controlled in order to ensure that no damage is caused to the ecosystem of the pool bottoms as well as the natural coastal sediment transport. Bezet beach is considered the major turtle nesting site, so actual swimming, sun bathing, restaurant, windsurf, sailing, etc. and potential uses must consider their protection as a priority. The same applies to the Regional county Akhziv-beach, which is also unprotected for the time being.

Impacts related to nautical sports

Sailing concentrates around public beaches which are used as launching points. This informal access points may result in compaction and erosion of soil and damage to vegetation, or by standing with the board on the coastal platform and harm the vermetid reef. Because these crafts are used to happen around the same water area than swimmers, conflict for space could be an issue if activities grow in future.

At present, engine crafts are not allowed closer than 300 m from the coastline, however this limitation is not always observed, leading to conflicts with other users as well as disturbing marine communities in shallow waters. Also, despite any access to 100 meters around the rocky islands already declared nature reserve is forbidden, some water-based craft and particularly cruising boats get too close causing a direct disturbance for birds that use these rocky islands as roosting areas. There is not speed limitation for motor boats, a source of disturbance for the fishing breeding grounds and turtles because of the noise and


potential physical harm by the propeller. Motor craft may also be a source of marine pollution due to uncontrolled waste discharging, litter and antifouling painting.

Impacts related to rod fishing

Recreational fishing with rod from the coastline is becoming an issue because the number of rod fishermen is increasing, causing erosion on the reef communities by standing and walking along the rocky shore edge and bait gathering. The impact on fish communities remains unknown. Rod recreational fishing may be increasing partly due to access facilities such as the beach road and parking lots together with the fact that they are not asked for a license or an entrance fee. Impact on fish communities and bait species should be monitored to avoid overexploitation of target species, although according to expert observers it could be significant in the northern breeding grounds for fish.

Impacts related to scuba diving

Diving activities can lead to wildlife disturbance, although the more observable impacts are generally those caused by irresponsible removal or damage to species. There is no anchoring buoy at the main diving sites, which could cause potential communities degradation because of uncontrolled anchoring. Spearfishing scuba diving practice is jeopardizing marine diversity and target fish populations due to selective fishing of the bigger sizes. According to the present Ranger of the area this activity is very difficult to control. At present the information on diving regulations, on fishing prohibition or on environmental values is very scarce or not available for visiting divers.

Impacts related to access and parking

Due to the large number of visitors coming to these coastal zone during the summer season, existing car parks are not enough to accomplish with the demand. This limitation turns into an issue because many cars park anywhere leading to negative impact on vegetation and sand habitats or causing noise and stress to visitors. At present a line of boulders has been placed along the beach-side of the road and the NPA is also considering closing the beach road and asking for a fee to car entry.

f) Public use – tourism relationship

Rosh Haniqra – Akhziv seashore is a popular tourist destination for both local and national tourists. Tourism offer relays on accommodation facilities (e.g. Rosh Haniqra recreation site, Akhziv recreation site and Akhziv field School), services associated to beaches and National Park amenities. Although tourism is not the most important business in the area, there are some new projects aiming at increasing the number of rooms as well as parking capacities (e.g. in RH

National Park). As different consulted experts appointed, when peace comes the flow of visitors will increase and so will the pressure on the natural resources. Today, tourism based on marine nature resources has not been really exploited, but the present demand will grow after the establishment of the marine reserve and the foreseen improvement of the marine activities services, as both facts have always attracted new visitors interested in marine nature. Because tourism and public use are so closely related, future tourism trends should be taken into account to prevent potential conservation issues within the proposed RHAMR.

5.3.3. Synthesis of values and issues

The area represents one of the best Mediterranean marine habitats along the Israel coast with major resources for marine environmental interpretation and education. It also offers a wide range of opportunities for promoting low impact marine recreation and ensuring high quality visitor experience.

Public use must be limited by conservation objectives, such as turtle nesting sites, fishing breeding grounds, bio-organic reefs and bird roosting areas. Today, illegal marine activities (spear fishing scuba diving) jeopardize marine life and uncontrolled access to the coastal zone leads to both environmental impacts such as marine and coastal habitat degradation and a decrease of visitor experience quality. The lack of facilities and services for public environmental awareness is a major issue to be addressed.

5.3.4. Objectives and principles

Objectives: - To promote public use opportunities and ensure quality experiences for visitors, while preventing impacts from recreation and visitation activities. - To raise nature understanding, appreciation and awareness through information and education. - To provide new opportunities to improve the local welfare and contribute to the self-finance of the RHAMR. Guiding Principles Existing and potential recreational activities should be managed in such a way to minimize environmental impacts, increase nature appreciation, enhance visitor’s experiences and improve visitors’ safety.

To ensure minimal environmental impacts

- Diversification of visited sites and type of activities is basic to avoid overcrowding and minimize environmental impacts.


- Recreational activities which are potentially damaging need to be restricted and allocated at less sensitive natural areas. - Improving marine and coastal nature understanding and awareness within visitors and voluntary agreements with the main stakeholders in education activities.

To maximize the quality of the experience

- Standardized quality services and information facilities. - Separate incompatible activities to avoid conflicts among users. - Visitors should be informed about all restrictions, and about the benefit of economical management measures for improving visitors facilities and services. - Risks to visitors should be identified and minimised. - Establish the carrying capacity for each activity or site to avoid potential impacts and overcrowding, through regular monitoring (see Section 5.3.), including monitoring of visitor`s perceptions to assess improvements in the quality of the experience.

5.3.5. Management of recreational activities

The main regulations and recommendations for the management of recreational activities in the proposed RHAMR are described below along with main priority actions, when needed, which are identified in Map 7.

Also, a full set of Recommendations for most of the activities ahead are synthsised at the end of this Chapter.

a) Swimming, use of the beach and dune

Regulations

- Use of the beaches other than public or private should be restricted to walking, sun bathing, swimming and educational activities.

- No fixed structures, umbrellas, free dogs, no lights or fires should be allowed on the beach during the turtle nesting season from May to September. - No motor vehicles should be allowed anytime on the beach and coastal dunes. - Visitors should pay attention to all regulations and recommendations specified for the use of beaches, coastal footpath trails, viewpoints, picnic areas and camping sites, avoiding standing on the organic reef nor collecting or touching any wild species. - The authority in charge must ensure that sea water in public beaches meets the swimming quality standards. - To avoid conflict between users, a floating device may mark the swimming exclusive zone.

- Artificial lighting and noisy activities minimized during turtle nesting season. - Camping should be discouraged on the beaches and promoted at a camping site. - The authority in charge must ensure that sea water in public beaches meets the swimming quality standards.

At the end of this Chapter there are recommendations for the establishment of a Snorkel Trail.

b) Nautical sports

Management actions should focus on promoting low impact sea water sports. Under the following proposed regulations and guidelines:

Regulations for motor boating

- Only guided cruising tours under conditioned authorization will be allowed into the Core Area, provided they do not anchor at any place. - All motor boats will keep 300 meters away off the coastline except in the marked launching point-corridor. Boats under authorization (diving and tours) will be subject to max. speed of 10 knots to minimize wash and disturbance and prevent accidents with swimmers, divers or turtles by protecting the propeller with appropriate cages. - Cleaning the craft at sea and discharging any sewage, oils or fuels and littering should be forbidden. - Jet skiing will only be allowed in a restricted area between the launching point adjacent to the Phoenician harbor and the southern islets.

Regulations for sailing

- Sailing boats and windsurf boards could be allowed anywhere, except in the swimming restricted area, with the right permit in case of the Core Area, and provided they do not anchor in rocky, coraligenous, or Maerl bottoms. - Windsurf, kite-surf, dinghy sailing and similar crafts can only be launched from public beaches.

Priority actions (see Map 7)

Provide a marked device to delimit restricted jet-skiing area. A land-based sign should be used to mark the extent of this area as well as to indicate regulations.

d

d

d

dd

20

30

10

5

50

100

1010

10

£Meters

250 500 750 1.000125

3 1

Proposed Public Uses in Akhziv-Rosh Haniqra Marine Reserve

MAP 7:

RoadsRailwayBathymetric Line10

Public Beach

Beach

Coastal Dune

National Park

IA Parkingd View Point

4 Car Entry ControlCar Entry Subject to Fee and Parking CapacityClosed Access"DCar ExitControl Point!.

123

Jet Skiing Restricted AreaCamping SiteDiving Mooring buoy

5 Wooden Trail Access for Dune System

Interpretative

Å B Accessing

h WelcomeE Identification (General Information of a Certain Facility)

Marine Visitor CentreInformation Points

67

Signals8

Snorkeling Trail9

LEBANON

2

"D

!.

h

h

E

IAIA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA

IA Å BÅ B

E

E

E

E

E

5

5

5

"DE

E

E

E

6

7

7

7

9

9


c) Rod recreational fishing

Regulations

In respect of a recreational tradition whose impact has not yet been documented, the NPA may consider a temporal allowance of rod fishing from the coast under the following restrictions:

- Restricted to the area south of Bezet beach, from sunrise to sunset. - Only one rod per fishermen. - Picking bait and discharging any litter or fishing gear into the sea would be forbidden. - Other measures could be: encourage no-death fishing; establishing a maximum catch, or a closed season, as recommended by future studies.

d) Scuba diving

Scuba diving management actions should be focused in avoiding impacts on marine wildlife, increasing awareness on marine values for divers and ensuring quality and security. The following regulations and guidelines are proposed:

Regulations

- Scuba diving may only be practiced under supervision of a diving guide. - Diving clubs under authorization will be responsible to make sure that maximum size of diving groups is of eight divers and that all divers have a recognized diving license. They will also be responsible for briefing all divers on the basic regulations of the proposed RHAMR and the fragility of the marine resources, and to monitor and report any possible harm done by anchoring or divers. - Nobody would be allowed to collect or touch any marine plant or animal or to feed fish.

5.3.6. Management of facilities for visitors

a) Beach and surrounding area facilities

Regulations

- Services in public beaches by private concessionaires, as well as allocation of new services and facilities should be subject to NPA authorization. - No building should be allowed in the Extensive Buffer Zone. - Facilities other than wooden trails or protection fences should be forbidden in beach and dunes. - Public beaches should provide: lifeguard, first aids, cleaning up works, boards for information on water quality, and emergency phones.


To provide a controlled camping site is necessary, either using the already existing private facilities close to raod 4, or establishing a new site at the entrance of the RHAMR to avoid environmental impacts along the beach. In this case, this facility should be allocated out of the beach. Services included may be shades, toilet, drinking water, litter container, first aids, parking site along with information about the proposed RHAMR.

A picnic area also is recommended to avoid barbecues at the beach, provided with wooden tables and benches, barbecue sites, litter containers and identification signs.

b) Boating-related facilities

Regulations

- Any new facilities or enlargement of existing ones will need NPA authorization, ensuring environmental compatibility and when possible, disabled people needs. - Anchoring should not be allowed in the Core Area and at any rocky, coraligenous, or Maerl sea bottom except for emergency reasons. - Mooring and launching of motor boats should only be allowed at the inlet adjacent to the Phoenician harbor. - Low impact nautical sports such as canoeing and rowing should be promoted.


Diving clubs should propose a buoy system at the most popular diving sites in case deemed necessary. The buoy could be established by the NPA but the Diving Club should be responsible for its maintenance.

c) Facilities to control entrance

Access control is needed to:

• Avoid overcrowding

• Ensure quality environmental standards of the area and to minimize natural resources degradation, and

• Improve quality visitor experiences.

Regulations

- Access to the beach, sea shore and car parking will be only allowed at designated sites. - New parking facilities should be subject to NPA authorization.


Priority actions (see Map 7

Provide a control car entrance mechanism to the beach road by:

Car entrance subject to a fee and restricted to the south gate (beach road and Road 4 junction). One of the two northern entrances may be definitely closed, and the other could be allowed only as an exit for cars. A control point should be provided at least at the entrance point to ask the fee and close the entrance when parking capacity is full.

Other options may involve completely closing the beach road to cars, providing a parking lot at the entrance, perhaps closing on a seasonal basis and promoting alternative transport means such as cycling, train or bus.

Provide wooden trails for accessing the beach along dune systems.

d) Recommendations on visitors safety

Preventive measures to promote reasonable visitors behavior may involve: Identification and interpretative signals as

well as by general information and education materials. Develop a code of conduct on a voluntary

basis outlining acceptable behaviour and rules for particular sports. Priority codes of conduct are for diving, sailing, motor-boating and beach use. Codes of conduct should be produced by tourism operators involved in exploiting these activities such as Diving clubs and private concessionaires on public beaches.

Corrective measures such as emergency protocols should also be provided for all public use facilities and activities. The main priority should be those related with marine rescue. Tourism operators should have emergency protocols, as well as public beach concessionaires.

5.3.7. Information and education guidelines

Raising understanding and appreciation of marine and coastal environment is a priority in order to improve visitor’s behaviour, decreasing environmental impacts, and making visitors aware of nature values and possibilities for enjoyment in a sustainable way. To accomplish this objective a strategy for information and education needs to be developed and implemented.

a) Information and communication

All visitor facilities should be used to widely disseminate information. Information and communication is fundamental for visitors to adopt appropriate behaviors that will reduce impacts and provide them with a more satisfying visit. Information involves the provision of data, facts and advice to visitors concerning the reserve, its values, visitor facilities and services, rules and regulations, and to facilitate the interpretation of the coastal and marine values and ecological systems for the purposes of conservation, education and tourism. Management initiatives should be focused on providing information and communication mechanisms which ensure information in a comprehensive way for all types of visitors taking account of different ages, cultural status and language.

b) Education and interpretation

The primary benefit from effective education programmes is a visitor population which gains understanding and appreciation of the protected area. This in turn can help reduce visitor impacts and provide greater public support for the reserve. The interpretation of nature increases the value added of a site. It is demonstrated that interpretation enlarges the time of stay, enriches the experience and dignifies the resource. It also allows segmentation of the product to be shown. Interpretation involves providing information to visitors in such a way that they will be stimulated to learn more, so it is more than the presentation of data and facts, but includes weaving them together so that visitors come to understand, and appreciate the values for which the reserve was established. Education and interpretation activities and materials should be oriented mainly to children (e.g. by organizing education programmes for local schools), and target groups directly involved in activities likely to impact natural resources, such as divers, fishermen and beach users. Education and interpretation activities may be undertaken by the NPA staff or through local operators under authorization or concession. The NPA also may involve volunteers to undertake some education activities.

Voluntary agreements could be also promoted to involve the main stakeholders in education activities. The main initiatives may include:

- Involving diving clubs and the sailing school, producing with them a code of conduct for practicing water sports as well as providing trained guides on marine education. - Taking advantage of the high flow of visitors to Rosh Haniqra NP and Akhziv NP to undertake education strategies such as


guided trails and allocation of interpretive displays. - Encouraging local schools to take their children to marine and coastal educational activities. - Coordinate with the education activities developed by the SPNI.

Other actions to increase visitor understanding and appreciation could be promoting guided diving trails and guided cruising trips which could take advantage of historical context (e.g. wrecks and a replica of a Phoenician boat to Rosh Haniqra).

c) Information and education facilities

The NPA should establish a Marine Visitor Center; plus information points, signals and trails.

A Marine Visitor Center and information points would be the primary reference for visitor’s reception and a fundamental mean for education and interpretation promotion. At the end of this Section there are recommendations for the establishment of this Marine Visitor Centre.

Priority actions (see Map7)

Marine Visitor Center at entrance of the beach road, close to the proposed camping site. SPNI building could serve this purpose without needing to build a new one.

Provide Information points at intensily used sites. Priority locations may be the Akhziv National Park, Rosh Haniqra National Park and Bezet beach.

Provide a set of signals for welcome, allocation, access and interpretation:

- Wellcome signs: at Phoenician harbor and road junction.

- Allocation signs: at public beaches, launching point, information points, Marine Visitor Center, National Parks, parking sites and viewpoints among other facilities.

- Access signs at entrances from the main road to main facilities.

- Interpretative signs: a panoramic sign at Rosh Haniqra viewpoint, a vermedit reef interpretative sign at viewpoint of Neqarot Lookout path, a dune system interpretative sign at the wooden trail dune entrance, and a marine ecosystem interpretative sign at the Phoenician harbor.

Provide a snorkeling trail to introduce visitors to marine environment.

The Marine Visitor Center may be used as the headquarters for environmental interpretation

and education along with research services. The management of the visitor reception and information facilities may be done through private concessionaires under conditioned agreements with the NPA, or by NPA staff, same as signed trails. Recommendations are given at the end of this Section.

Signed trails diversify visitors use and introduce visitors in nature enjoyment and appreciation.

Some services such as guided trails should be subject to fee to contribute to self-financing the reserve. Signal scheme plays important functions such as welcoming visitors, giving information on services location, guiding users, avoiding environmental impacts by encouraging sound behaviors, while increasing visitor knowledge of the area.

5.3.8. Programme Management

a) Staff

Given the relative importance of this programme, a Public Use coordinator would be the priority technical staff after the Reserve Director (or ranger).

Recommended main duties should be:

• Supervise maintenance of public use facilities (either belonging to the NPA or under concession).

• Supervise work of guides (both contracted by NPA and those from the tourism operators).

• Coordinate environmental education, information and communication material and activities.

• Organize and coordinate volunteer work.

• Advising about the granting of authorizations, licenses and concessions related to public use activities, facilities and services.

Depending on the development of information points, the Marine Marine Visitor Center, and the guided services, diverse staff will be needed. At least 3 guides, information point staff (1 person), Marine Marine Visitor Center (2 or 3 depending on the services), 1 person at car entrance control point, 1 person for seasonal information and education campaigns (e.g. turtles, cleaning up activities, etc.) and 1 person for seasonal surveys on visitor quality experience. At least the last two could be handled by volunteer personnel.

Maybe a lifeguard service should be contracted during the summer season or take advantage of existing lifeguard services by voluntary agreements.

b) Participation / co-management

A quality Public Use and Education Programme will benefit some local businesses, so it is strongly recommended to establish conditioned


concessions, or in other cases voluntary arrangements between the NPA and stakeholders with interest in the reserve to involve them in some management actions. Main shared management activities should be surveillance, information and education.

Codes of practice, charters and certification schemes can underpin such voluntary arrangements. The following are suggested:

- Advisory code of practice for visitors, inducing appropriate behaviour in the reserve in general terms, being target-visitors orientated (diving, motor boating, etc.)

- Charters, which set general principles for tourism in protected areas. An example of a regional system of this kind in Europe, is the European Charter for Sustainable Tourism in Protected Areas.

Possible stakeholders to participate in surveillance, information and education activities through their existing facilities may be:

- Rosh Haniqra Qibutz (National Park)

- Regional Council Mate Aser (Akhziv and Bezet beach)

- Club Med and Tourism resorts

- Diving clubs and local associations (sea sports, others.)

- Tourist Association for the Western Galilei

- The SPNI

Participation of volunteers is also strongly recommended and it should be encouraged for education and information campaigns.

c) Concessions and authorizations

At least the following services and facilities should be subject to concession or authorization in case they are not directly managed by the NPA staff:

- Scuba diving, cruising trips, guided trails (snorkeling and walking)

- Public beaches services and facilities (restaurants, disco, toilets, showers, changing rooms, boat rental, etc.) and boating-related facilities.

- Camping site and parking lots in case placed inside the RHARM.

- Marine Visitor Center and Information Points.

An Example of information requirements for granting diving clubs authorization can be found within the Recommendations <t the end of this Section.

d) Training

At least following training programmes should be developed:

- For the proposed RHAMR Programme Coordinators (Administration, Public Use, Monitoring). Major topics: visitor and community relations, public use management approaches, financial planning and business skills, environmental education, conflict resolution, environmental monitoring, patrolling and law enforcement.

- Training courses for those guides (Guided diving trails and guided cruising tours) to be contracted by the NPA or tourism operators. Main topics: ecological and natural values of the marine reserve, existing regulation and management scheme, environmental education.

- Training courses for those working at the Marine Visitor Center.

e) Carrying capacity and Monitoring

Indicators (see previous Chapter 5.2.) will be needed to evaluate the adequacy of this Public Use and Education Programme in achieving its objectives.

The baseline capacity can be set on the present visitation figures (e.g. 200,000), while any undesirable changes are monitored in order to adjust the number of visitors to the different sites and activities. Reviewing or further limitation of activities may be needed if monitoring finds that environmental issues are not addressed, that the intensity of use is causing environmental harm or jeopardising the quality of the visitor’s experience.


Recommendations on nautical sports Launching points other than those established at public beaches are strongly discouraged unless demand increases in which caseany new launching points should be subject to environmental assessment. Motor boats must avoid causing excessive wake or wash and respect the rights of other users by extending due care and courtesyto them and windsurfs, kite-surfs and dinghy sailing. Measures for protecting the propeller may be enforced for cruising boats getting into the Core Area and during summer season inthe Extensive Buffer Area. The NPA may establish further limitations to control boat size, number of passengers and speed (e.g. up to 15 knots) as well asmotor boats operating tourist tours on the basis of reported conservation impacts and carrying capacity. The number of jet-skiingmay be also restricted if deemed necessary for conservation reasons, or for safety or comfort considerations with the other

Recommendations recreational fishing Rod fishermen should only use signalized access to reach the shore, and pay attention to avoid standing and walking on organicreef to avoid its erosion. In order to control intensity of rod fishing activity, fishermen should be quantified and registered in a census by paying an entrancefee, or through seasonal licenses with a more convenient price for frequent fishermen which may involve training programmes toencourage good practice. The census could be combined with monitoring of fish catch (species, size, season), done inparticipation with a selected group of rod fishermen. The creation of a local rod fishermen group is recommended.

Recommendations on scuba diving Divers should avoid fining close to bottom and rocky shore to minimize damages to marine life, leave wrecks undamaged for theenjoyment of other divers and report any findings to the administration in charge. Diving clubs should avoid overcrowding diving sites by observing a maximum frequency of at least 15 min. between two dives atthe same site. Scuba diving guided trails should be promoted for amateur divers.

Recommendations on beach facilities Public and private beach concessionaires including boat rental operators should be responsible to ensure that:

• Allocation of beach facilities avoiding the more fragile areas such as dune systems or turtle nesting sites. • Any trail located within the beach or dune should be built with detachable wood. • New facilities should be landscape and environmentally integrated and preferably detachable and removed from the

beach every season. • Inform users about proposed RHAMR regulations and natural values and encourage responsible behavior. • All rubbish and waste produced by services such as toilets, showers, restaurants and similar are treated in a responsible

manner. • Cleaning up works should be undertaken through manual methods, at least on the dunes, along the intertidal beach

fringe, and during turtle nesting season on the whole beach.

Recommendationes on Boat Facilities Should demand for utilization of the existing launching and mooring facilities increase, a close monitoring should be undertaken toavoid overcrowding and environmental impacts. Management actions may include the implementation of a license system or theprovision of new facilities subject to an environmental assessment and carrying capacity and allocation outside the proposedRHAMR as priority.

Recommendations on entrance facilities Existing access through dune systems should be closed and discouraged except for those selected and provided a wooden trail.Regular maintenance work to keep the lines of boulders along the road beach is desirable. Car parking should be properly marked with an identification sign and new facilities for parking should be allocated as far aspossible from beaches and dune systems and either outside the RHARM boundaries or in the already existing parking lot inAkhziv. Promotion of the use of other transport means such as train, bus service and cycling. The old Nahariyya train service could be anopportunity to avoid private cars and to control vistors inflow into the propose RHARM


Recommended information and communications initiatives Divulgation of the proposed Nature Reserve designation. It could be done through newspaper, radio broadcasts, posters. A leaflet dealing with generic Marine Reserve features: values, need for conservation, public use opportunities, generalregulations, zoning. Face to face provision of information (through information points, Marine Visitor Center, field-based information campaigns byvolunteers). Internet web site to reach a wide range of users before visiting RHAMR

A snorkel trail should be designed and managed following these requests:

- The snorkel trail should be visited in 30-45 minutes, with groups up to 8 visitors and children under 12 with an adult. - Resting sites should be provided. - Signals, floating ropes on border line with yellow buoys every 3 m. - Bigger buoys may mark the most interesting sites. - No boats are allowed. - Underwater panels (e.g. 50x70 cm) should be set 0.5 - 2 m deep depending on water depth. - The trail should be surveyed by a boat or guard equipped with radio and first aid including O2.

Coastal footpath trails should be designed in account of:

- Link other facilities like public beaches and viewpoints (e.g. from Bezet beach to Rosh Haniqra viewpoint) to encourage beach users to discover new values and associated activities. - Provide resting places, with shade if possible, and rubbish bins. - Interpretative signals of main natural features. - Directional signs to drive people within the trail. - Information sings of regulations and security measures. - Coastal footpath trails should take advantage of existing footpath to minimize trampling and erosion within representative areas of coastal nature.

Recommended guidelines for Public Use facilities:

• When possible, restore existing buildings before building a new one. If a new building is needed it should be placed within the Intensive Buffer Area. Materials, height and color should be environmental sound and respect local traditional constructions.

• The allocation of signals must ensure any natural damage and visual intrusion and a proper size according with their functions, ensuring that the chosen location represents major representative marine or coastal features but not the most sensitive area.

• Facilities should take into account disable needs.

Recommended education and interpretative materials

• Interpretative signs. Main topics should be vermedit reef and rocky pools, marine habitat and rocky islands and dune systems illustrating their main features, associated wildlife, ecological importance and main threats (following recommendations described at signals chapter).

• Code of conduct for main recreation activities. Priority activities should be diving, motor boating, rod fishing, beach use and swimming.

• Printed material for promoting marine nature-based activities such as guided diving trails and self-guided trails (snorkeling, walking). Some suggestions are seabed maps and marine life identification charts.

• Edition of field work guides aiding to develop environmental education activities along the marine and coastal zone.

Recommended means for disseminating information

• Signals, Marine Visitor Center, information points, car parks • Existing recreational sites (Akhziv NP, Rosh Haniqra NP, public beaches). • Local operators such as diving clubs and sailing schools. • Tourist Association for Western Galilei


Recommended guidelines for a Marine Visitor Centre

• The Marine Visitor Center may be used as the headquarters for environmental interpretation and education along with investigation and documentation services of the protected areas.

• The management of the visitor reception and information facilities may be done through private concessionaires under conditioned agreements with the NPA, or by NPA staff, same as signed trails.

• Some services such as guided trails should be subject to fee to contribute to self-financing the reserve. • When possible, restore existing buildings before building a new one. If a new building is needed it should be placed

within the Intensive Buffer Area. Materials, height and color should be environmental sound and respect local traditional constructions.

• The allocation of signals must ensure any natural damage and visual intrusion and a proper size according with their functions, ensuring that the chosen location represents major representative marine or coastal features but not the most sensitive area facilities should take into account disable needs.

The Marine Centre information Would provide:

• All information regarding the protected area (natural, social and cultural features). • Inform and suggest recreation and nature-based activities (guided trails, viewpoints, picnic sites, public beaches, sea

sports, diving, etc.), along with existing facilities and regulations. • Tourism-related information (accommodation, diving clubs, cruising tours, etc.). • Interpretation material on natural values both printed and on site displays along with interactive visual and touching

plays. • Basic services: accessing, identification and interpretation signals, first aids, toilet, drinking water point, rubbish

container, telephone, cleaning up and maintenance works. • Complementary services: commercial facilities (e.g. bar, restaurant, souvenirs shop, etc.).

Location and design suggestions:

• Make sure an easy entrance from main road access. If it is possible, the best location should be at the entrance of the protected areas (Akhziv).

• Provide a parking lot not further than 50 meters of main building

Information to be provided by the Diving Clubs:

• Name and responsible manager of the Club • Third party insurance • Evidence of competence • Emergency protocols (including recompression chamber for diving) • Detailed description of type of services (courses, scuba diving, snorkeling) and identification of requirements and

infrastructure to be used (number and characteristics of the diving boats including engine power, length, type of boat, type of anchor, protection of propeller, registration number).

• Intensity of use: number of divers and diving boats per day and dive, main dates or periods of diver visitors, likely diving sites identified on a map)

• Evidence of knowledge of the RHAMR • Description of the education facilities for divers (training guides, marine charts, codes of conduct)


ANNEXES

1. List of internationally protected species in the Biodiversity Protocol to the Barcelona Convention

2. Monitoring examples

3. Literature cite


ANNEX 1

List of internationally protected species in the Biodiversity Protocol of the Barcelona Convention

ANNEX II Barcelona Convention Protocol V

LIST OF ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES Magnoliophyta Posidonia oceanica Zostera marina Zostera noltii Chlorophyta Caulerpa ollivieri Phaeophyta Cystoseira amentacea (including var. stricta and var. spicata) Cystoseira mediterranea Cystoseira sedoides Cystoseira spinosa (including C. adriatica) Cystoseira zosteroides Laminaria rodriguezii Rhodophyta Goniolithon byssoides Lithophyllum lichenoides Ptilophora mediterranea Schimmelmannia schousboei Porifera Asbestopluma hypogea Aplysina sp. plur. Axinella cannabina Axinella polypoides Geodia cydonium Ircinia foetida Ircinia pipetta Petrobiona massiliana Tethya sp. plur. Cnidaria Astroides calycularis Errina aspera Gerardia savaglia Echinodermata Asterina pancerii Centrostephanus longispinus Ophidiaster ophidianus Bryozoa Hornera lichenoides Mollusca Ranella olearia (= Argobuccinum olearium = A. giganteum) Charonia lampas (= Ch. rubicunda = Ch. nodifera) Charonia tritonis (= Ch. seguenziae) Dendropoma petraeum

Erosaria spurca Gibbula nivosa Lithophaga lithophaga Luria lurida (= Cypraea lurida) Mitra zonata Patella ferruginea Patella nigra Pholas dactylus Pinna nobilis Pinna rudis (= P. pernula) Schilderia achatidea Tonna galea Zonaria pyrum Crustacea Ocypode cursor Pachylasma giganteum Pisces Acipenser naccarii Acipenser sturio Aphanius fasciatus Aphanius iberus Cetorhinus maximus Carcharodon carcharias Hippocampus ramulosus Hippocampus hippocampus Huso huso Lethenteron zanandreai Mobula mobular Pomatoschistus canestrinii Pomatoschistus tortonesei Valencia hispanica Valencia letourneuxi Reptiles Caretta caretta Chelonia mydas Dermochelys coriacea Eretmochelys imbricata Lepidochelys kempii Trionyx triunguis Aves Pandion haliaetus Calonectris diomedea Falco eleonorae Hydrobates pelagicus Larus audouinii Numenius tenuirostris Phalacrocorax aristotelis Phalacrocorax pygmaeus Pelecanus onocrotalus Pelecanus crispus Phoenicopterus ruber


Puffinus yelkouan Sterna albifrons Sterna bengalensis Sterna sandvicensis Mammalia Balaenoptera acutorostrata Balaenoptera borealis Balaenoptera physalus Delphinus delphis Eubalaena glacialis Globicephala melas Grampus griseus Kogia simus Megaptera novaeangliae Mesoplodon densirostris Monachus monachus Orcinus orca Phocoena phocoena Physeter macrocephalus Pseudorca crassidens Stenella coeruleoalba Steno bredanensis Tursiops truncatus Ziphius cavirostris

LIST OF SPECIES WHOSE EXPLOITATION IS REGULATE Porifera Hippospongia communis Spongia agaricina Spongia officinalis Spongia zimocca Cnidaria Antipathes sp. plur. Corallium rubrum Echinodermata Paracentrotus lividus Crustacea Homarus gammarus Maja squinado Palinurus elephas Scyllarides latus Scyllarus pigmaeus Scyllarus arctus Pisces Alosa alosa Alosa fallax Anguilla anguilla Epinephelus marginatus Isurus oxyrinchus Lamna nasus Lampetra fluviatilis Petromyzon marinus Prionace glauca Raja alba Sciaena umbra Squatina squatina Thunnus thynnus Umbrina cirrosa Xiphias gladius


ANNEX 2

MONITORING EXAMPLES Some examples for monitoring on the proposed indicators are given in this Annex, following Jimenez (2003). These are not developed protocols, only indications that may be useful for the NPA staff to start monitoring. EXAMPLE 1. FISHES:

Species of economic value to be monitored in MPA. Epinephelus marginatus and Diplodus sp. (Photo: Institut d’Ecología Litoral, Alicante, Spain).

Methods: Fish counts along different line transects, inside and outside the protected area. Underwater line transects for visual census is a standardized method worldwide, with long data series in the Mediterranean (Harmelin-Vivien et al., 1985). Fisheries research techniques (e.g. Catch per Effort Unit-CPUE) offer understandable figures for fishermen to prove spillover effects outside the protected area (Bennet & Attwood, 1993).

One case: Medes Island MPA (Girona, Spain) was established in 1990, with total fishing prohibition in the core area. A monitoring system for fish populations, specially grouper (E. marginatus) and other species vulnerable to fishing was developed, through fish counts along different line transects, inside and outside the protected area. As a result, a general increase in fish numbers was proved, but with important interannual changes. At the same time, a general decrease in average size/age suggested density increase was due partly to recruitment. Species like the grouper change sex with age, and medium ages represent higher females proportion (reproduction potential).

70 13

TR

A

0102030405060

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99

2000

N. f

ishe

s

789

101112

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99

2000

Age

(yea

rs)

020406080

100120140

91 93 95 97 99

N. f

ishe

s

55

)

ime evolution of some fishes in Medes Islands MR (Girona, Spubies et al. (2000)

B
B
A

253035404550

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99

2000

Tota

l len

ght (

cm

ain). A: Grouper (E. marginatus); B: Sea-bass (D. labrax). From García-


EXAMPLE 2: MONITORING FAN MUSSEL (Pinna nobilis)

Fun mussel is a giant bivalve mollusc endemic of the Mediterranean, protected by the Barcelona Convention. It is sensitive to pollution, illegal divers extraction, trawling, anchoring (shell breakage). These species are easy to identify and with a high potential public profile. These species are sesile and sample plots can be fixed and exactly positioned (GIS). However, it needs scuba diving and a high number of stratified samples (depths and habitats) to obtain comparable figures. Variables to monitor are population density, structure and shell damage. Methods:

Density: Indirect sampling (aquaplane or underwater video) may underestimate populations in dense Posidonia beds but may be appropriate in RHAMR. Direct sampling by scuba-diving can be calculated both by linear transects and by sample areas, usually working two divers together. Circle sampling (10 m radium) has proved to detect higher numbers than line transects (Table).

Meted N. ind.

0-5 m depth N. ind.

5-10 m depth N. ind.

10-15 m depth 3 x 200 m2 line transects (600 m2) 2 8 16 3 x 200 m2 line circles (600 m2) 2 13 22

Number of fan mussels counted by two methods in Moraira Bay (Alicante, Spain). GARCÍA-CARRASCOSA & GARCÍA- MARCH, 2003 (Valencia Univ. unpub.)

Population structure: Can be inferred from shell-size distribution. It is not possible to measure directly the total size because part of the shell is buried and fixed to the substrate. Nevertheless, total length can be deduced from measurements of the emerged part of the shell (García-March et al 2002).

Measurements of living fan mussels to determinate total dimensions of the shell. (University of Valencia)

Expertise: Two scuba divers can study 3-5 samples/day (10 m radium), including density, population estimates (shell size) and description of the habitat. The calculation of global densities and population structure may require certain statistical skills.

One case: Densities of fan mussel in a proposed MPA. Serra Gelada coast (Alicante, Spain), a proposed Nature 2000 site for its marine life. Exact delimitation of MPA is controversial and needs to be sustained by protected species distribution. Fan mussel was selected among other indicators to detect high quality (priority) sites for protection. Ninety-six 10 m-radium samples were randomly selected, at 6-30 m depths, each one positioned with GPS. As a result, densities in the area ranged from 0 to 4 mussels/100 m2. High density sites were proposed to be included in the proposed MPA.

Study of fan mussel density in Benidorm and Altea Bays (AlicAlicante).

B
A
ante). A: Sample design; B: Mussel density in one area. (University of


MONITORING PUBLIC USE: Marine Protected Area managers usually control visitors either through limiting numbers (quotas) or restricting access to some areas (zoning). In order to check the accomplishment of regulations, how the management provisions suit the demand, and unveil foreseeable conflicts, it is essential to keep an updated database of visitors flow. If it can not be done daily, it should be monitored through a regular sampling. A concern is that trends in visitors arrival need to be considered in a wider perspective as they may be influenced by external conditions (easy of transportation, complementary offers, prices). This type of monitoring can be developed by field staff with short training and following standardised protocols of data register. Tourism businesses should contribute, particularly those holding concessions incide the protected area. It is recommended to simplify monitoring to the most frequent activities or those which represent a potential risk to the conservation regime. In situations when a visitor performs several activities it is better to register only one, preferably the most potentially impacting one (e.g. fishing > mooring > sailing) or (swimming > cable car). EXAMPLE 3. FRECUENTATION: The recommended indicators are: Number of visitors, Distribution through the year, Distribution through the area, and Maximum annual visitation. Other interesting data are origin, sex, age and how they arrive.

o Activities, number of visitors per month. Particularly number of daily dives and number of divers

o Number of diving days at each site, and number f boats at each diving site. If it gets intense, then the % of time that a boat is present at each site would be the best indicator

o Diving: All dive operations in the Park are required to provide daily records of which sites they dive, as well as the number of divers and the number of dives. These records enable diving preassure to be closely monitored.

o Census and type of boats per season, and route of boats by radar into GPS EXAMPLE 4. VISITOR’S ACTIVITIES IN AN ISLAND (Jimenez 2003):

From daily control of boats in the Columbretes islands (Spain) the trends in activities by visiting sport boats were deduced:

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Diving

Fishing

Mooring

Sailing

n: 596 barcos n: 938 n: 1.247 n: 1.245 n: 1.825 n: 1.564 Trends in main activities of sport boats in Columbretes MPA. In the graph, the top grey colour is diving, the lower (very small figures) is sailing.

Diving showed the higher increase rate (> 1.000% 1990-94), so a special regulation for this activity was approved in 1996. Recreational fishing was the second activity showing a higher increase potential (380% 1990-98), so it was regulated since 1999.


EXAMPLE 5: THE DIVERS OPINION ABOUT A MARINE RESERVE Medes Islands MPA is a prime scuba diving destination in NE Spain, with a long recreational and commercial tradition. Since the establishment of the protection regime in 1990, the carrying capacity of divers (quotas) has been controversial between tourist operators (asking for a increase) and managers (trying to decrease previous frequentation levels). A survey was taken sampling 500 divers in 1998-99 (out of a estimated population of 20.000). Personal interviews asked for scuba divers profile (sex, age, origin, profession, studies,..... ), reasons to choose Medes MPA and level of satisfaction of their visit (Mundet & Ribera, 2001). The main reason to choose Medes was its rich marine life, while prices only ranked the seventh position. Most of the divers were satisfied of their visit (see the Figure). A feasible conclusion is that only by conserving the natural environment will the tourist diving industry be maintained, because the divers place interest in nature as the most important reason for choosing their diving destination.

Disappointed

Don't know/non-resp

Better than

expected

As expecte

d

0 20 40 60 80 100Rich marine life

Geographicalproximity

Quality ofinfrastructures

Cleanliness of water

dates of divingseason

Fiendliness of localpeople

Prices

Safety

%

Interviews with divers visiting Medes Islands MPA. A: Reasons giving for choosing Medes as a diving place. B: Overall impression of their visit. After Mundet & Ribera (2001). EXAMPLE 6: SOCIAL APPROVAL One of the best ways to check if the objectives of recreation or sustainable development are achieved, is simply asking the users about their opinion on the MPA regulations and implementation. Certainly a poor, weak or bad response to management should be taken into account for long-term protection. There are three interesting variables to follow:

14. Visitors’ satisfaction with quality/prices/safety. 15. Satisfaction of stakeholders, including their approval, economic results, non-use valuation 16. Number of press releases

Response from visitors: Gathering information from users about why they visit the MPA, what expectations they had and their general opinion about the visit. The easiest way is simply asking users about their opinion about the protection regime and management provisions. This can be done at the beginning and later every 3-5 years, by personal interviews, polls, organizing meetings or discussion groups. The involvement of social scientist and consultants is recommended. As an example the following Table presents results about the perceived changes after the establishment of a marine reserve and sanctuary -obtained through local interviews- in San Salvador Island Marine Reserve and Fish Sanctuary (Philippines) (White et al. 2002)

1990 1998 Satisfaction with fishing arrangements

Sanctuary management 3.24 6.21

Reserve management 3.26 5.88

Mangrove management 2.67 6.62

Benefits from the marine reserve 3.17 6.31

Household well being 4.17 6.71

Household income 3.52 6.38


ANNEX 3. LITERATURE CITED Almagor, G., 1976. (cit. Goren & Galil 2004). Physical properties, consolidation processes and slumping in the Mediterranean continental slope off southern Israel. Geological Survey of Israel Report No. MG/4/76, 132 pp. [Hebrew].) Almagor, G., and J. K. Hall. 1980. (cit. Goren & Galil 2004). Morphology of the continental margin off northern Israel and southern Lebanon. Israel Journal of Earth Science, 29:245-252. Baker, J.L. (ed.). 2000. Guide to Marine Protected Areas. Department for Environment. South Australia. Becker, Nir, et al. 2004. Socio-economic analysis of Rosh Haniqra National Park. University of Haifa, Israel. 42 pp. Bennet, B.A. & Attwood, C.G., 1991. Evidence for recovery of a surf-zone fish assemblage following the establishment of a marine reserve on the southern coast of South Africa. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 75: 173-181. Borrini-Feyerabend, G. 1996. Collaborative management in protected areas: tailoring the approach to the context. Issues in social policy. IUCN, Gland (Switzerland), 67 pp. Boudouresque, C.F. 1995. The Marine Biodiversity in the Mediterranean: status of species, populations and communities. RAC-SPA UNEP. Tunis. Cifuentes, M. 1992. Determinacion de la capacidad de carga turistica en áreas protegidas. CATIE, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza. Turrialba, Costa Rica. Clark, J.R. (Ed.). 1991. Carrying capacity: a stutus report on marine and coastal parks and reserves. University of Miami / US National Park Service. Wash.DC. Davey, A.G. 1998. National System Planning for Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland-CH and Cambridge, UK. 71 pp. Domenech, J. 2002. La biodiversidad del mar Mediterráneo: situación actual y papel en el funcionamiento del ecosistema. Simposio Internacional. Biodiversidad Mediterránea: bases para su gestión y conservación. Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad (CIBIO), Universidad de Alicante. Febrero 2002. FAO.1999. El estado mundial de la pesca y la acuicultura. Roma. www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/fishery Gabay, Soshana. 2002. The Environment in Israel. Ministry of the Environment. State of Israel. 275 pp. Galil BS. 2000 (cit. Goren & Galil 2004). A sea under siege – alien species in the Mediterranean. Biological Invasions 2: 177-186 Galil, Bella., M. Goren and R. Ortal. (¿2000?). Shikmona between Carmel and Sea. Funded by Ramsar Fund for Wetland Conservation and Wise Use. Israel. Galil BS, Kevrekidis K. 2002 (cit. Goren & Galil 2004). Exotic decapods and a stomatopod off Rhodes Island (Greece) and the Eastern Mediterranean Transient. Crustaceana 75(7): 925-930 García Raso, J.E. and J. Templado. 1995. Espacios Naturales marinos Protegidos de Andalucía. In: Estudios sobre Areas Protegidas marinas e islas del Mediterráneo español. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. Pp. 45-52. García-March, J. R., García-Carrascosa, A.M. & Peña, A.L., 2002. In situ measurements of Pinna nobilis shells for age and growth studies: a new device. Marine Ecology, 23 (3): 207-217. Golani, D. and A. Ben Tuvia. 1995 (cit. Goren & Galil 2004). Lessepsian migration and the Mediterranean Fisheries of Israel. In: Armantrout, N.B. (ed.). Condition of the world’s aquatic habitats. Proc. . World Fisheries Congress. Theme 1. 279-289 pp. Science Publishers, Lebanon, New Hampshire. González Serrano, J.L. 1995. Problemas de gestión de las áreas marinas protegidas. In: Estudios sobre Áreas Protegidas marinas e islas del Mediterráneo español. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. Pp. 19-26. Goren, M. and B. Galil. 2004. The biodiverssity of the Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv Nature Reserve (Israel). Report to RAC/SPA, Draft 3 - Oct 2004.

http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/fishery


Harmelin-Vivien, M.L., Harmelin, J.G., Chauvet, C., Duval, C., Galzin, R., Lejeune, P., Barnabé, G., Blanc, F., Chevalier, R., Cucler, j. & Laserre, G., 1985. Evaluation visuelle des peuplements et populations des poissons: methodes et problemes. Rev. Ecol. (Terre Vie), 40: 467-539. IUCN-WCPA. 1994. Parks for Life: Action for Protected Areas in Europe. Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas (1994). IUCN, Gland, CH and Cambridge, UK. IUCN. 2003. marine protected Area categories. Draft case study, reviewed. IUCN, and Cardiff University. www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/biome/marine/programme.htm IUCN-WCPA-WWF. 2003. Report on the High Seas Marine Protected Areas Workshop, 15-17 January 2003, Malaga (Spain) to the Eight Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice. Jiménez, J. 2000. El Uso Turístico en las reservas marinas del litoral Mediterráneo. I Congreso Nacional de Reservas Marinas, Murcia, Spain. Jiménez, J. 2003. Monitoring Marine Protected Areas. Specialised course for SPA managers in the Mediterranean. Marseille, Febr. 2004. PANGEA Consultores SL, Madrid, for Rac/Spa, UNEP/MAP. Tunis. Jones, P. 2001. Stakeholder participation in protected areas. Environment and Social Research Unit. Department of Geography. University College, London. Kelleher, G., Bleakley, C & Wells, S., 1995. Priority areas for a global representative system of marine protected areas. Four Volume Report to the World Bank Environment Department, Washington DC. López Ornat, A. 1997. Assessment on the management of marine and coastal Specially Protected Areas in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean Action Plan-UNEP. Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas (Rac/Spa), Tunis. López Ornat, A. & E.Correas. 2003. Management of Protected Areas in the Mediterranean. Assessment of opportunities of Networks and Action Plans. IUCN and Ministry of Environment of Spain. 151 pp. Nobel, I. & Norton, G. , 1991. Economic aspects of monitoring for national park management. In Margules, G. & Austin, M. (eds.): Nature conservation: Cost effective biological surveys and data analysis. CSIRO. Australia. MAP 1987. UNEP - Mediterranean Action Plan. La gestion dún espace protege en Mediterranee, Exemple du Parc National de Port-Cros (Var, France). First Meeting of Focal Points, Athens. June 1987. 27 pp. MAP 1995. UNEP - Mediterranean Action Plan, Phase II (1995-2005). Barcelona Convention. UNEP - Regional Activity Centre for Especially Protected Areas. Tunis. Pritchard, Paul. 1992. Carrying capacity for protected areas: an overview. Paper presented at the IV World Congress on Protected Areas. IUCN. Caracas, Febr.1992. Queensland State. 2003. Management Plan for the Green Island Recreation Area and National Park. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency. Queensland, Australia. 24 pp. RAC/SPA. 1997. Assessment on the management of marine and coastal Specially Protected Areas in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean Action Plan-UNEP. Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas, Tunis. Ramos, A. & McNeill, S.E. 1994. The Status of Marine Conservation in Spain. Ocean & Coastal Management 24:125-138. Ramos, A. et al. 2004. Marine biological study in the Rosh Haniqra-Akhziv Marine Reserve area, Israel. Project MedMPA-Rac/Spa – Universidad de Alicante. Spain. Riera Aragó, V. 1999. Gestión de las actividades subacuáticas en las áreas protegidas de las islas Medes (Cataluña). In: Actas de las I Jornadas Internacionales sobre Reservas Marinas, Murcia, March 1999. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación. Spain. Pp. 313-319. Roberts, C. 1995. A rapid build-up of fish biomass in a Caribbean marine reserve. Conservation Biology, 9 (4): 815-826. Roberts, C.M. and Hawkins, J.P. 1997. How small can a marine reserve be and still be effective? Coral Reefs 16: 150. Salm, R. And J. Clarke. 1999. Marine and coastal protected areas: a guide for planners and managers, 2nd edition. IUCN, Gland, CH and Island Press, Wash.DC

http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/biome/marine/programme.htm


Schultz, E.G., S.F. McCool and D. Kooistra. 1999. Management Plan for the Saba Marine Park. Saba Conservation Foundation. Saba, Neatherlands Antilles.46 pp. Stankey, G.H., D.N. Cole, R.C. Lucas, M.E. Petersen and S.S. Frissel. 1985. The Limits of Acceptable Change system for wilderness planning. USDA Forest Service, General Tech. Report INT-176. Ogen, Utah: Intermountain Forest Experiment Station. USA. State of Israel. 2002. Environmental quality standards for the Mediterranean Sea in Israel. Ministry of the Environment. 36 pp. Tisdell, C. and J.C. Broadus. 1989. Policy issues related to the establishment and management of Marine reserves. Coastal Management, 17: 37-53 UNEP. 1995. Guidelines for integrated management of coastal and marine areas. UNEP Regional Seas Report and Studies 161: 1-80 UNEP- MAP. 1996. Mediterranean Action Plan. UNEP. 1999. A Blue Plan for the Mediterranean People. Villa, F., L. Tunesi & T. Agardy. 2002. Zoning marine Protected Areas through Spatial Múltiple-Criteria Análisis: the case of Asinara Island National Marine Reserve in Italy. Conservation Biology 16 (2): 515-526 Werner, R. (1999). Prospects for the establishment of “No Fishing Zones” in the Mediterranean Sea. Endangered Seas Campaign, WWF International. White, A.T., Courtney, C.A., & Salamanca, A., 2002. Experience with Marine Protected Area Planning and Management in the Philippines. Coastal Management, 20: 1-26. WCPA-IUCN. 1996. Protected Areas in North Africa and Middle East. World Commission on Protected Areas. IUCN. Gland (CH).

RAC-SPA

united nations environmental programme- mediterranean action plan

Documents