Côte agathoise Marine Protected Area «Posidonia of Cap d Agde» Natura 2000 marine site (France)

Transcription

1 Côte agathoise Marine Protected Area «Posidonia of Cap d Agde» Natura 2000 marine site (France) An example of management in a context of many stakeholders Renaud Dupuy de la Grandrive, director of the MPA Credit photos: Mathieu Foulquié, Renaud Dupuy de la Grandrive, Sylvain Blouet

2 Côte agathoise MPA (France) Posidonies du Cap d Agde Natura 2000 Site Photo Renaud Dupuy de la Grandrive/ Adena

3 Photo Renaud Dupuy de la Grandrive

4

5

6 Marine Protected Area «Posidonia of Cap d Agde» Natura 2000 marine site 6152 hectares, N2000 considered as an MPA Diversity of habitats : - Posidonia meadows * - Rocky habitats - Coralligenous * - Sandy bottoms Protected and remarkable species : - Tursiops truncatus * - Posidonia oceanica - Lithophaga lithophaga - Pinna nobilis - Cystoseira - Caretta caretta - Seabirds One small volcanic island Specifity of marine and terrestrial volcanic areas

7 Recreational fishing max 150 boats / day Spearefishing Artisanal fishing > 30 boats Diving dives / year Many (many!) maritime activities turists / day in summer Nautical sports Sailing and port 4000 places Ecotourism 7000 visitors / year Beach and bathing

8 MANAGEMENT PLAN and ACTIONS 6 objectives declined in 77 actions 1 - Conservation of the natural heritage 2 Keep the integrated activities 3 Control of the external factors 4 - Communication and awareness campains 5- Ecological surveys and deepening of the knowledge 6 Study of the management effectivness

9 Internal GOVERNANCE MANAGER (City of Agde) > MPA management part of the Direction of the Sea of the city >Team of 4 permanent staff: marine biologists, management, education, public awareness, communication, secretariat - 1 director (Sea direction and MPA) - 2 marine programme officers - 1 secretariat > Team of 4 seasonal staff: - underwater trail (2) - ecological mooring survey area (2) > Technical materials (2 boats, diving and scientific equipements, ) > 1 administrative and 1 technical small offices

10 General GOVERNANCE STEERING COMITEE (one per year) Maritime prefecture (chairman), coastal and terrestrial authorities 45 persons : administrations, local authorities, local representative stakeholders, NGO s MANAGER = City of Agde contracting with environment, water and MPA s administrations, and private companies INFORMAL WORKING GROUPS WITH LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS WORKING GRUPS Artisanal fishermen Diving clubs Involvement in NETWORKS MedPAN, MPA Forum, DIRECT CONTACTS AND RELATIONSHIPS localy, scientists Strategic levels (regional, french mediterranean frontage, and national)

11 MANAGEMENT TOTAL BUDGET / year > staff current operating budget current investsment budget Specific budgets 2017 Natura 2000 contracts : EFF (FEAMP) contract : Call Water Agency «Biodiversity» : > 10 regular technical and financial parters

12 Natura 2000 Charter > Volontary and no contractual approach > The charter marks a commitment for strong values and objectives of Natura 2000 marine site > No financial compensation General comitments : Distribution of human pressures Ecological surveys Information Mooring Quality of the waters Targeted activities: Diving Fishing (professional and recreational) Spearfishing engagement Sailing Local authorities (city) Companies Since 2011, more than 100 organisms and persons have signed this charter including professional and associatives structures, local authorities, personalities

13 STUDY IMPACT NATURA 2000 Regarding to the law, each maritime project or big marine event inside the N2000 marine site must be analysed through its potential impacts on N2000 habitats and species The manager of the MPA gives to the responsable of the project the characteristics of the N2000 site (habitats, species, maps,,,,), analyses the project, gives advices, its point of view but finally it is the maritime authority that accept the project or not! EXAMPLE 2016 : Jetski competition > modification of the position of the buoys

14 Natura 2000 contracts A volontary approach with the french environment ministry and EC financial aids Ecological moorings area Leader: City of Agde Budget : (2 years) Floating anchors Leader : fishing NGO Budget : Coralligenous restoration Leader : City of Agde Budget : Ecological moorings 300 m line Leader: City of Agde Budget : Take of abandoned moorings Leader: City of Agde Budget :

15 Directly involve some stakeholders working inside the MPA Objective : involve the professional artisanal fishermen during 3 years Experimentation for special traps to protect coralligeneous habitat with more selective fishing methods > Artificial reefs: they participate to the survey > Communication on the projects (leaflets, panels)

16 RELATIONSHIP AND COMMUNICATION

17 COMMUNICATION

18 COMMUNICATION

19 COMMUNICATION

20 CAPITALIZATION

21 HOW TO EVALUATE? Example of the mooring area management Tableau récapitulatif des indicateurs biologiques, de connaissance, d'opinion, de gestion de juillet 2016 En gras, valeur de 2015 Objectif de la ZMEL But 1 : Protection des habitats et espèces But 2 : Sécuriser la zone pour les usagers Catégorie d'indicateur Indicateur Très mauvais Mauvais Moyen Bon Très bon Indéterminé Variation de l'indice entre 2015 et 2016 Posidonie (taux de recouvrement) -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% Posidonie (densité) Biologique Grande Nacre (nb de Grande Nacre/100m²) 5,2 8,3 Taille moyenne des Grande Nacre (comparaison ultérieure) De connaissance Connaissance des buts de la ZMEL -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x <0,6 0,6 x<1 Connaissance de la réglementation -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x <0,6 0,6 x<1 Perception de la réglementation -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x <0,6 0,6 x<1 D'opinion Perception de la réglementation par les professionnels -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x <0,6 0,6 x<1 Perception de la sécurité -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x <0,6 0,6 x<1 De gestion Comportements illicites x<60 30 x<45 15 x<30 <15 De connaissance Connaissances des buts de la ZMEL -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 Perception de la ZMEL comme outil de protection de l'environnement -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 = But 4 : Acceptation de la Perception de la ZMEL comme outil de protection de l'environnement par les professionnels -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 ZMEL par les usagers D'opinion Satisfaction des aménagements -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 = Satisfaction des aménagements par les professionnels -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 Perception des conflits -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 = Perception des conflits par les professionnels -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1 But 5 : Participation des De gestion acteurs à la gestion Adhésion des socio-professionnels 0 2 x<5 5 x<8 10 But 6 : Mise en place Nombre de sorties de la patrouille bleue d'une gestion technique Moyens humains et techniques De gestion et administrative Bugdet de fonctionnement (hors installation efficace 2014) Macro-déchets (volume L) 7 5 x<7 3 x<5 1 x<3 x 1 Application smartphone De gestion But 7 : Communication Patrouille bleue (nb de personnes sensibilisées) et sensibilisation auprès Outils de communication (score) x 2 2 < x 4 4 < x 6 6 < x 8 8 < x 10 du public D'opinion Suffisance d'information -1 x <-0,6-0,6 x<-0,2-0,2 x< 0,2 0,2 x<0,6 0,6 x<1

22

23 Thank you for your attention!