Providing protection to selected marine species is nothing new to Maine and the rest of New England, but the results have not always satisfied fishermen or environmentalists. Now some scientists are suggesting that reserves entirely off limits to fishing may be the best way to fortify fish stocks while forging a closer relationship between fishermen and environmentalists.

“It’s big, old fish breeding in protected reserves that produce many times more offspring than are produced in exploited fishing areas,” says marine biologist Callum Roberts.

Roberts, who spoke recently at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, or AAAS, in Boston, has studied extensively the worldwide effectiveness of marine reserves, also referred to as no-take Marine Protected Areas, or MPAs. He says they are essential for protecting not only the large seniors, but the entire spectrum of sea life in the Gulf of Maine.

MPAs, which can be under the supervision of different government entities, are of varying sizes and can serve several functions, from protecting fish to controlling coastal development.

Limited fishing is allowed in some MPAs; in others the ban is absolute. Roberts generally advocates total bans, even if the reserves have to be smaller as a result.

Roberts’ work suggests that fish in reserves produce many times more offspring because they are not only more numerous, but also more mature. His latest study confirms that fishing in waters adjacent to the reserves is so good that the total amount of fish actually increases despite reduction in fishing area.

James Acheson, a professor of anthropology and marine sciences at the University of Maine, introduced a seminar at the annual meeting on marine resource management and identified no-take MPAs as an intriguing possibility for Maine.

“You have lobster that are doing well and others [species] aren’t at all,” said the anthropologist, who has had a long-standing interest in Maine fishing communities. “MPAs seem to be the one thing that we’ve tried that really work. I think we should try a few more of them.”

Acheson points to Georges Bank, where a no-take MPA that met with initial resistance improved everything from scallops to groundfish.

The state and federal scientists, says Acheson, “were not too happy” with the MPA program initially. “Their reaction was that if even a few fish were saved they would merely migrate into other areas where they would be caught. But it has worked out well. Stocks appear to be a lot more localized, and in those areas stock sizes of those species seem to be increasing.”

The best-known MPA in the United States is the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge at Cape Canaveral, Fla. It is a fully protected reserve encompassing two small areas that have been closed to public access and fishing for security reasons since 1962. Most of the record-size drum and sea trout caught in the last 10 years in Florida were caught nearby.

MPAs, however, are rarely completely off limits to fishing. Stellwagen Bank, in Massachusetts Bay, for instance, is referred to as an MPA, yet only a small portion of it is restricted to the fishing of cod and flatfish.

Nor is there a complete ban on fishing in most Gulf of Maine MPAs, which exist to control coastal development, mineral extraction, pollution and overfishing. They include Jeffries Ledge, which stretches from off Cape Elizabeth to Rockport, and the Western Gulf of Maine Fishery Closed Area.

Roberts, a professor at the University of York in Britain who was last year a visiting professor at Harvard, prefers numerous, small reserves that are carefully planned and started with the cooperation of local fishermen and conservationists.

“Split up into small enough areas, no-take reserves can be spread out along the Gulf of Maine to protect the full spectrum of different habitat types in the region,” he said.

The size of the reserves would be dependent on the movement of the kinds of animals being protected: small near a bay or harbor and larger off shore in areas inhabited generally by larger fish. Sites also would be chosen based on vulnerability to fishing.

What works in one place might not work in another, however.

“I’m not sure that bringing fishermen and conservationists together in the same place always works out awfully well,” says Acheson. “Their points of view aren’t the same. What I think has to happen is that somehow, someway you have to convince the industry that it’s in bad shape and they know that and having MPAs is in fact a sensible and effective way to start bringing back the fish.

One thing that would help is if we had seminars, like the Fishermen’s Forum, where the results of MPA experiments in other parts of the world are discussed and you could look at the hard numbers. There have been case studies in Mexico and Philippines with extraordinary results.”

The protection that reserves offer lobsters may have additional appeal for Maine fishermen. The Gulf of Maine – a 50,000-square-mile region from Nova Scotia and Cape Cod – is especially susceptible to invasion by new species. “What happens,” warns Roberts, “if these high densities of Maine lobsters fall prey to an introduced disease that can sweep through and wipe out a population?”

The presence of reserves need not mean a reduction of lobster catches either, says Roberts. It all comes back to the big, old fish (in this case lobsters). “This is where marine reserves can deliver where present approaches to fishing management cannot. They will sustain populations, which have big, old individuals that are able to survive through periods when environmental conditions are too poor for recruitment of young.”

MPAs in New Zealand and South Africa are noted for supporting large populations of big lobsters. Securing the ecosystems processes that supply fish and increase resilience of fish populations, says Roberts, means that “when the conditions aren’t great for lobster, cod or any fish there’s always something to come back to.”

Acheson and Roberts agree that poorly implemented MPAs, particularly in California and the Caribbean, offer important lessons. There they have proliferated since the 1970s, becoming environmentally trendy, but doing little overall good.

Fishery managers as well as governmental agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service often have conflicting agendas and most existing reserves have not been enforced. National marine sanctuaries often overlap areas with state beaches as well. And few of the approximately 105 MPAs in U.S. waters are completely closed to fishing.

“They were trying to manage the different types of uses people make of those areas rather than trying to figure out whether they are adequately delivering protection,” says Roberts. “What was discovered was how little was being protected.”

Acheson foresees a “not-in-my-back-yard” response to no-take MPAs in Maine. One placed outside a home harbor, for example, could create a disadvantage.

“They help certain people and harm others. And they set up an incentive for people to buy larger, speedier boats – exactly what you don’t want to do,” he said. “I think there would be a way people in the industry would try to innovate around an MPA.”

Roberts said, however, that experience from around the world suggests that reserves in your back yard are the best thing. “The greatest benefits accrue to those living nearby.”

Meanwhile, fishermen have concerns of their own.

“There are fishermen who support no-take MPAs, but want to be involved in their implementation. They know where the best spawning grounds and fishing areas are and feel they should be in on the decision-making. Many environmentalists are working on the definitions and characteristics, but the fishermen want to be at the table,” said Carla Morin, assistant director of the Northwest Marine Alliance, a commercial fishing lobbying group.