Page 7 - Monachus_2015

A. A. Karamanlidis et al. The Mediterranean monk seal

by fishermen. Angered over actual or perceived damage regional and international treaties, and European Union
caused by monk seals, including loss of catch and tearing of regulations (Isräels 1992). Currently, in all areas [e.g. the
nets, fishermen take the offensive by shooting seals, or even eastern Atlantic (González et al. 2006), Mediterranean Sea
in the past by dynamiting caves (Goedicke 1981). Deliberate (Notarbartolo di Sciara 2013)] and countries [e.g. Greece
killing of Mediterranean monk seals by fishermen has been (Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 2009), Turkey (Kiraç et al.
a serious threat to the species in Greece, Turkey, and Cabo 2013)] with significant monk seal populations, policy-
Blanco. Deliberate killing was responsible for a third of the makers have drafted and are implementing, with varying
mortalities recorded between 1991 and 1995 in Greece, degrees of vigour and commitment, Action Plans for the
affecting mostly adult monk seals (Androukaki et al. 1999), conservation of the species. There is a general scientific con-
and has played an important role in the decline of the sensus that in situ conservation efforts are the most impor-
population of the species in Turkey (Güçlüsoy et al. 2004, tant conservation priority for the monk seal. The main in
Kiraç et al. 2013). In the Cabo Blanco region, deliberate situ conservation priorities and actions identified in these
killing, mainly by fishermen, may well have been respon- Action Plans are: habitat protection; mitigating negative
sible for the extirpation of monk seal populations hauling interactions between monk seals and fisheries; scientific
out on open beaches (González & Fernandez de Larrinoa research and monitoring of local seal subpopulations; edu-
2012). cation and public awareness campaigns; and rescue and
Interactions between monk seals and fisheries are a great rehabilitation of wounded, sick, and orphaned seals.
conservation concern throughout the species’ range Habitat protection has been identified as the most impor-
(Güçlüsoy & Savas¸ 2003b, Güçlüsoy 2008, Karamanlidis tant conservation priority for the Mediterranean monk seal.
et al. 2008, Hale et al. 2011, González & Fernandez de Considering the behaviour and ecology of the monk seal,
Larrinoa 2012). Mediterranean monk seals can become conservationists believe that, in Greece, a network of well-
entangled in static nets (Johnson & Karamanlidis 2000), managed and guarded reserves are essential and are the
and accidental entanglement and drowning is a major foremost priority for the survival of the species
source of mortality in the eastern Mediterranean, especially (Adamantopoulou et al. 2000). Legislative measures,
for subadult animals (Veryeri et al. 2001, Karamanlidis et al. research, management, and conservation actions designed
2008, Kiraç et al. 2013). Similarly, at Cabo Blanco illegal to protect important monk seal habitat are currently in
industrial and artisanal fishing is one of the main threats to place in the following areas: the Desertas Islands Nature
the survival of the colony; it mainly affects subadult monk Reserve in the Madeira Archipelago, the National Marine
seals (González & Fernandez de Larrinoa 2012). Park of Alonnisos – Northern Sporades Islands, the marine
Although limited availability of food and stochastic and protected area in Northern Karpathos – Saria and the
unusual events are acknowledged as mortality factors affect- 3-mile no-take zone at the island of Gyaros in Greece, the
ing the Mediterranean monk seal, they are not generally no-fishing area of the Cap Blanc Peninsula, and the partici-
considered to constitute serious threats to the survival of the pative reserve that has been created in order to protect the
species. Overfishing, which may affect seals’ growth, repro- pupping caves of the Cabo Blanco monk seal subpopula-
duction, juvenile survival and mortality rate, and drive monk tion. In Turkey, conservation efforts focus on five coastal
seals away from their natal areas (Isräels 1992), has been locations in the country: Foça, Karaburun, Alaçatı-Sigacik,
implicated in the local disappearance of monk seals inAlgeria the Bodrum Peninsula, and the Cilician coasts, although
(Boudouresque & Lefevre 1988),Greece (Marchessaux 1979), serious concerns have been raised about the efficacy of
and southern Turkey (Gücü et al. 2004).Stochastic events can management and implementation (Kiraç et al. 2013). Suit-
also have a serious impact on the survival of an endangered able monk seal habitat currently under effective protection
species (Soulé 1987) such as the Mediterranean monk seal. is considered substantially inadequate, and additional
Stochastic and unusual events that have caused monk seal marine protected areas are necessary to secure the survival
mortality in the past include toxic algal blooms (Costas & of the species, especially in countries such as Greece and
Lopez-Rodas 1998,Hernández et al. 1998,Reyero et al. 2000), Turkey where suitable habitat is still available. Because of
predation by sharks (Pujol 2015), virus outbreaks (Osterhaus management lapses or inadequacy, lack of funding, moni-
et al. 1998), rock slides and cave collapses (Panou et al. 1993, toring and guarding, coupled with indifferent support by
González et al. 1997), and abnormally low sea temperatures local stakeholders, some potentially important monk seal
(Berkes et al. 1979). reserves are currently deemed unfit for purpose, and a sub-
stantial effort will be required to remedy this (Johnson et al.
2006).
CONSERVATION PRIORITIES AND ACTIONS
Mitigating negative interactions between monk seals and
The Mediterranean monk seal is protected by legal statute fisheries has been the focus of concerted conservation
throughout its range through numerous national laws, actions in all four main parts of the species’ range

Mammal Review (2015) © 2015 The Mammal Society and John Wiley & Sons Ltd 7