Recognising the need for data gathering at taxon level besides the taxa of commercial interest and those listed as endangered in the Protocol of the Barcelona Convention, but still exploited by Man, the present study attempts to gather and review the available scientific information on molluscs of minor commercial importance in order to assist in the adequate management and protection of their populations. Forty one species (18 gastropods, 13 bivalves, and 10 cephalopods) of minor commercial interest are treated in the present work with details on their biogeographic distribution, exploitation and conservation status in Hellas. Apart from a few species (e.g., Pinna nobilis, Lithophaga lithophaga, Donacilla cornea), and these only at a local scale, there is no population assessment in Hellenic seas. The existing legislation for eleven of these species is not enforced in practice, and seems insufficient to guarantee their conservation. It is suggested that targeted collection data, networked nationally and internationally, should be promoted so this invaluable source of biodiversity information can be accessed for conservation and planning purposes.
International agreements as well as European and national legislation prohibit exploitation and trading of a number of edible marine shelled molluscs, due to either significant declines in their populations or destructive fishing practices. However, enforcement of existing legislation in Greece is ineffective and many populations of "protected" species continue to decline, mainly due to poaching. The extent of illegal trading of protected bivalves and gastropods in Greek seafood restaurants was investigated by interviewing owners or managers of 219 such restaurants in 92 localities. Interviews were based on questionnaires regarding the frequency of availability in the menus and the origin of twenty-one species or groups of species, among which eight are protected - illegally exploited. Forty-two percent of the surveyed restaurants were found to serve at least one of the protected ¬- illegally exploited species. Among the illegally traded species, Lithophaga lithophaga, Pecten jacobaeus, and Pinnanobilis were served in a relatively high proportion of the surveyed restaurants (22.8%, 19.2%, and 16.4% respectively), outrunning many commercial species. In many cases these species were always or often available (11.4%, 4.6% and 5.0% respectively). There was substantial spatial variation in the proportion of restaurants that illegally served protected species with differing patterns for each species; very high proportions of illegal trading were observed in some marine regions (e.g., date mussels were served in >65% of the seafood restaurants along the coastline of Evvoikos Gulf). In most cases the illegally traded species were of local origin, while there was no finding of illegally imported molluscs from other countries. The strategy for enforcement of existing legislation should be greatly improved otherwise protection of shelled molluscs will remain ineffective.
The European Union (EU) has committed to an ambitious biodiversity recovery plan in its Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and the Green Deal. These policies aim to halt biodiversity loss and move towards sustainable development, focusing on restoring degraded habitats, extending the network of protected areas (PAs), and improving the effectiveness of management, governance, and funding. The achievement of conservation goals must be founded on understanding past successes and failures. Here, we summarise the strengths and weaknesses of past EU biodiversity conservation policies and practices and explore future opportunities and challenges. We focus on four main aspects: i) coordination among and within the EU Member States, ii) integration of biodiversity conservation into socio-economic sectors, iii) adequacy and sufficiency of funds, and iv) governance and stakeholder participation.Whilst past conservation efforts have benefitted from common rules across the EU and funding mechanisms, they have failed at operationalizing coordination within and across the Member States, integrating biodiversity conservation into other sectoral policies, adequately funding and effectively enforcing management, and facilitating stakeholder participation in decision-making. Future biodiversity conservation would benefit from an extended and better-managed network of PAs, additional novel funding opportunities, including the private sector, and enhanced co-governance. However, it will be critical to find sustainable solutions to potential conflicts between conservation goals and other socio-economic objectives and to resolve inconsistencies across sectoral policies.
An up-to-date systematic review and unofficial codification of the national fisheries legislation was performed, along with an up-to-date systematic review of environmental, archaeological and maritime legislation, about spatio-temporal restrictions of fishing activities by all fishing gears in the Aegean Sea. Spatio-temporal restrictions established by the European Union and the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean were also reviewed. A database was built, including detailed information on the Fisheries Restricted Areas (FRAs) being identified. All FRAs were mapped, as polygons in Geographic Information System shapefiles. The national fisheries, environmental, archeological and maritime legal framework comprises of 32, 2, 37 and 43 legal acts respectively; EU and GFCM legislation consists of one Regulation and one Recommendation respectively. A total of 511 national (254 of fisheries, 21 of environmental, 85 of archaeological and 151 of the maritime legislation), 6 EU and 4 international FRAs were identified, out of which 85.2% are located in the Aegean Sea and 14.8% in Crete. Towed or mobile gears are restricted in 88.5% of the FRAs, while static gears are restricted in only 10.2% of FRAs. Fish stocks and Posidonia oceanica beds protection are the most common reasons for regulating fishing activities (25.3% and 25.0% respectively). Most of the FRAs (85.4%) impose permanent closures. National fisheries, environmental, archaeological, maritime, EU and international FRAs cover 25.8%, 1.0%, 1.1%, 0.4%, 13.5% and 22.6% of the study area, respectively. The present study provides valuable information for the Maritime Spatial Planning in the Aegean Sea.
The goal of ecosystem-based marine spatial management is to maintain marine ecosystems in a healthy, productive and resilient condition; hence, they can sustainably provide the needed goods and services for human welfare. However, the increasing pressures upon the marine realm threaten marine ecosystems, especially seabed biotopes, and thus a well-planned approach of managing use of marine space is essential to achieve sustainability. The relative value of seabed biotopes, evaluated on the basis of goods and services, is an important starting point for the spatial management of marine areas. Herein, 56 types of European seabed biotopes and their related goods, services, sensitivity issues, and conservation status were compiled, the latter referring to management and protection tools which currently apply for these biotopes at European or international level. Fishing activities, especially by benthic trawls, and marine pollution are the main threats to European seabed biotopes. Increased seawater turbidity, dredged sediment disposal, coastal constructions, biological invasions, mining, extraction of raw materials, shipping-related activities, tourism, hydrocarbon exploration, and even some practices of scientific research, also exert substantial pressure. Although some first steps have been taken to protect the European sea beds through international agreements and European and national legislation, a finer scale of classification and assessment of marine biotopes is considered crucial in shaping sound priorities and management guidelines towards the effective conservation and sustainability of European marine resources.
The goal of ecosystem-based marine spatial management is to maintain marine ecosystems in a healthy, productive and resilient condition; hence, they can sustainably provide the needed goods and services for human welfare. However, the increasing pressures upon the marine realm threaten marine ecosystems, especially seabed biotopes, and thus a well-planned approach of managing use of marine space is essential to achieve sustainability. The relative value of seabed biotopes, evaluated on the basis of goods and services, is an important starting point for the spatial management of marine areas. Herein, 56 types of European seabed biotopes and their related goods, services, sensitivity issues, and conservation status were compiled, the latter referring to management and protection tools which currently apply for these biotopes at European or international level. Fishing activities, especially by benthic trawls, and marine pollution are the main threats to European seabed biotopes. Increased seawater turbidity, dredged sediment disposal, coastal constructions, biological invasions, mining, extraction of raw materials, shipping-related activities, tourism, hydrocarbon exploration, and even some practices of scientific research, also exert substantial pressure. Although some first steps have been taken to protect the European sea beds through international agreements and European and national legislation, a finer scale of classification and assessment of marine biotopes is considered crucial in shaping sound priorities and management guidelines towards the effective conservation and sustainability of European marine resources.
Mapping of ecosystem components (natural and socioeconomic) is a prerequisite for ecosystem-based marine spatial management (EB-MSM). To initiate the process of EB-MSM in the Greek Ionian Sea and the adjacent gulfs, the main relevant ecosystem components were mapped based on existing spatial information and expert judgment. The natural components mapped included habitat types and species targeted for conservation, according to national and European legislation and international agreements. Main human activities/pressures related to fisheries, aquaculture, tourism, and industry were also mapped. In order to assess the quality of data used to map ecosystem components and therefore take into consideration the inherent uncertainty, an assessment of 5 semi-quantitative data indicators based on a pedigree matrix was conducted. Through this qualitative approach we gained information related to the sources, acquisition and verification procedures, statistical properties, and temporal & geographical correlation, along with the collection process quality of the ecosystem components under study. A substantial overlapping between ecological features and human activities was identified, confirming the need for a well-planned approach to marine space management, in order to mitigate conflicts for marine resources and conserve marine ecosystems and their associated goods and services.
Terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems are connected via multiple biophysical and ecological processes. Identifying and quantifying links among ecosystems is necessary for the uptake of integrated conservation actions across realms. Such actions are particularly important for species using habitats in more than one realm during their daily or life cycle. We reviewed information on the habitats of 2,408 species of European conservation concern and found that 30% of the species use habitats in multiple realms. Transportation and service corridors, which fragment species habitats, were identified as the most important threat impacting ~70% of the species. We examined information on 1,567 European Union (EU) conservation projects, funded over the past 25 years, to assess the adequacy of efforts towards the conservation of "multi-realm" species at a continental scale. We discovered that less than a third of "multi-realm" species benefited from projects that included conservation actions across multiple realms. To achieve the EU's conservation target of halting biodiversity loss by 2020 and effectively protect multi-realm species, integrated conservation efforts across realms should be reinforced by: 1) recognizing the need for integrated management at a policy level, 2) revising conservation funding priorities across realms, and 3) implementing integrated land-freshwater-sea conservation planning and management.
As a response to increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems, the legislation aimed at improving the conservation and management of marine coastal areas in European and Contiguous Seas (ECS) underwent crucial advances. ECS, however, still remain largely affected by increasing threats leading to biodiversity loss. Here, by using emblematic case studies and expert knowledge, we review current conservation tools, comparing their application in different areas to assess their effectiveness, potential for synergies, and contradictions. Despite regional differences in their application, the existing legislative frameworks have the potential to regulate human activities and to protect marine biodiversity. However, four challenges remain to be addressed to fully achieve environmental policy goals: (1) Lack of shared vision representing a limitation in transboundary collaboration. Although all EU countries are committed to fulfil EU Directives and other binding international legislative acts, a remarkable heterogeneity exists among countries in the compliance with the common legislation on conservation and in their degree of implementation. (2) Lack of systematic procedures for the selection of protected marine sites. Regional and national approaches in designating Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated marine protected areas (MPAs) reflect varying conservation targets and importance of conservation issues in political agendas. (3) Lack of coherent ecological networks. Natura 2000 sites and other MPAs are still far from reaching the status of effective networks in all considered case studies. (4) Hotspot of conflicts with private economic interests prevailing over conservation aims. Recommendations are given to overcome the fragmented approach still characterizing the conservation and management of coastal marine environments. Holistic, integrated, ecosystem-based, cross-cutting approaches can avoid conflicts among institutions so as to provide effective and timely solutions to current and future challenges concerning the conservation and management of marine ecosystems and associated goods and services.
More than 60 marine non-indigenous species (NIS) have been removed from previous lists and 84 species have been added, bringing the total to 986 alien species in the Mediterranean [775 in the eastern Mediterranean (EMED), 249 in the central Mediterranean (CMED), 190 in the Adriatic Sea (ADRIA) and 308 in the western Mediterranean (WMED)]. There were 48 new entries since 2011 which can be interpreted as approximately one new entry every two weeks. The number of alien species continues to increase, by 2-3 species per year for macrophytes, molluscs and polychaetes, 3-4 species per year for crustaceans, and 6 species per year for fish. The dominant group among alien species is molluscs (with 215 species), followed by crustaceans (159) and polychaetes (132). Macrophytes are the leading group of NIS in the ADRIA and the WMED, reaching 26-30% of all aliens, whereas in the EMED they barely constitute 10% of the introductions. In the EMED, molluscs are the most species-rich group, followed by crustaceans, fish and polychaetes. More than half (54%) of the marine alien species in the Mediterranean were probably introduced by corridors (mainly Suez). Shipping is blamed directly for the introduction of only 12 species, whereas it is assumed to be the most likely pathway of introduction (via ballasts or fouling) of another 300 species. For approximately 100 species shipping is a probable pathway along with the Suez Canal and/or aquaculture. Approximately 20 species have been introduced with certainty via aquaculture, while >50 species (mostly macroalgae), occurring in the vicinity of oyster farms, are assumed to be introduced accidentally as contaminants of imported species. A total of 18 species are assumed to have been introduced by the aquarium trade. Lessepsian species decline westwards, while the reverse pattern is evident for ship-mediated species and for those introduced with aquaculture. There is an increasing trend in new introductions via the Suez Canal and via shipping.
WOS: 000315934300019 ; More than 60 marine non-indigenous species (NIS) have been removed from previous lists and 84 species have been added, bringing the total to 986 alien species in the Mediterranean [(775 in the eastern Mediterranean (EMED), 249 in the central Mediterranean (CMED), 190 in the Adriatic Sea (ADRIA) and 308 in the western Mediterranean (WMED)]. There were 48 new entries since 2011 which can be interpreted as approximately one new entry every two weeks. The number of alien species continues to increase, by 2-3 species per year for macrophytes, molluscs and polychaetes, 3-4 species per year for crustaceans, and 6 species per year for fish. The dominant group among alien species is molluscs (with 215 species), followed by crustaceans (159) and polychaetes (132). Macrophytes are the leading group of NIS in the ADRIA and the WMED, reaching 26-30% of all aliens, whereas in the EMED they barely constitute 10% of the introductions. In the EMED, molluscs are the most species-rich group, followed by crustaceans, fish and polychaetes. More than half (54%) of the marine alien species in the Mediterranean were probably introduced by corridors (mainly Suez). Shipping is blamed directly for the introduction of only 12 species, whereas it is assumed to be the most likely pathway of introduction (via ballasts or fouling) of another 300 species. For approximately 100 species shipping is a probable pathway along with the Suez Canal and/or aquaculture. Approximately 20 species have been introduced with certainty via aquaculture, while >50 species (mostly macroalgae), occurring in the vicinity of oyster farms, are assumed to be introduced accidentally as contaminants of imported species. A total of 18 species are assumed to have been introduced by the aquarium trade. Lessepsian species decline westwards, while the reverse pattern is evident for ship-mediated species and for those introduced with aquaculture. There is an increasing trend in new introductions via the Suez Canal and via shipping. ; European CommunityEuropean Community (EC) [287600]; Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas of the UNEP/ Mediterranean Action Plan [67 /2011/RAC/RPA, 68 /2011/RAC/RPA, 69 /2011/RAC/RPA, 70 /2011/RAC/RPA, 71 /2011/RAC/RPA] ; The authors would like to thank G. Minos, P. Psomadakis, and D. Golani, for commenting on the nomenclature, distribution and establishment success of the fish and the anonymous reviewers whose comments substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. Sincere thanks are due to Mr N.J. Xentidis for preparing the figures. The research leading to these results was partly supported by funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme ([FP7/2007-2013]) under grant agreement no 287600 - PERSEUS project (Policy-oriented marine Environmental Research for the Southern European Seas). MAMIAS has been developed for the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas of the UNEP/ Mediterranean Action Plan under contracts No 67, 68, 69, 70 and 71 /2011/RAC/RPA.
