Further information

Many people have asked about the newly declared Chagos Protected Area, what differences it makes, and so on.  In order to help clarify several issues, answers to some of the most common questions are below.

For shallow reefs and islands, this clarifies several local protection laws that mostly already exist in piecemeal form, and substantially extends them.  A major new change is the extension of ‘no fishing’ to pelagic species throughout the very large area of deep water. Previously, huge quantities of fish and so-called bycatch (often targeted) have been taken.  This now will provide some refuge for declining fish stocks in the Indian Ocean.  Some fishing interests have argued that there is no point to this, because the half-million sq km would be too small to have any effect.  Other interests have said it is unnecessarily large!  However, a recent analysis by the Zoological Society of London suggests that the Marine Reserve will have a beneficial effect on pelagic species. As this MPA adds to new pelagic protected areas in adjacent countries, the total effective area will be even larger.

Who has jurisdiction over Chagos?

Chagos became British, previously French, about 200 years ago (Treaty of Paris, 1814). It was originally administered as part of a group with Mauritius, but when Mauritius became independent in 1968, Britain, with the agreement of Mauritius, retained Chagos for defence purposes. Currently it is a British Overseas Territory.  The UK has said it will cede sovereignty to Mauritius when the archipelago is no longer needed for defence purposes.

Is it really pristine?

The unqualified word ‘pristine’ is problematic, even in relation to Chagos.  It is pristine with regard to the many chemical pollutants that have been analysed.  Diego Garcia, with its military facility, is possibly one of the least contaminated inhabited atolls in the world.  But on land, two hundred years ago the native vegetation and bird colonies on most of the larger islands were destroyed to establish coconut plantations.  Rats were introduced (already a nuisance by the late 1700s).   Today, islands that were too small to convert have significant native trees, and are noisy with birds, while the previously inhabited islands are silent and covered with heavily derelict coconut plantations.

Underwater it is more complex, as documented in about 200 scientific, peer reviewed papers.  Chagos suffered from the mass coral mortality of 1998, but has been shown to be robust and has largely recovered in all ecological senses.  Even turtles are recovering from heavy past exploitation: annual export figures from a century ago approximately equalled the total population left by the 1970s.  Reef fish populations are exceptionally rich, and coral and soft coral cover is high.  Coconut crabs have recovered from near extinction to become abundant everywhere.  A number of species that have been subject to legal and illegal fishing, such as tuna, sharks and sea cucumbers, have had their populations depleted.  The protected area will hopefully help them restore their numbers back to more natural levels.

Are there areas of particular interest to scientific research?

For global and regional issues especially, Chagos fills a huge gap for work on atmospheric CO₂ levels, ocean carbonate levels, sea level work and other issues connected with global climate change.   Heterogeneity of reefs is high, from the ocean’s most wave-exposed to some of the most sheltered, with widely different coral assemblages.  Palaeo-climate work has been very successful, using cores of 300 year old Porites corals.  It is important today to understand what a reef system in excellent condition should look like, and this is one of very few locations where current interest in reef resilience can be researched, and it is a control site also for understanding fish populations and responses to climate change.  See the list of 200+ science publications arising from the last few expeditions (www.chagos-trust.org).

Are there poaching issues?

Poaching for sea cucumbers and sharks has been marked (see papers as above).  Pressures are likely to rise along with the rising Indian Ocean human population and with the decline in marine resources in those places.

Is Chagos a useful reference site to other scientists for other regions?

Chagos is already established as a reference point of great importance, with considerable demand from many of the world’s marine, environmental scientists. With its establishment as a protected area and greater awareness of the need, it is hoped that scientific work will be increased.

Is there any useful deep water biological science from this area?

None has yet been done.  Funding for such expensive work has always been difficult to obtain, but again with this area being better publicised and protected, this may make such science more attractive to funders

Is sea level rise or increasing storms likely to become problematic for the islands?

Almost certainly, but there are still uncertainties surrounding this at present.  Work by consultants nearly a decade ago suggested it would become a serious problem.  Since then there has been considerable shoreline erosion in many parts.  Measured sea level rise from a short time series is approximately 8 mm per year or more, which matches much longer records from the Maldives.  Dynamics of the coral islands is more complex, especially given periodic coral mortality, and this is currently being investigated.

Is the Protected Area just a ruse to prevent resettlement by the former inhabitants?

No.  The population was removed about 40 years ago - no conservation justification was needed then.  This conservation initiative was declared in April 2010.  If or when people return, the area will be in best possible condition.  The issue of resettlement of the archipelago is a separate legal issue from establishment and maintenance of the MPA.  Should resettlement ever be agreed, it has repeatedly been stated that the provisions of the MPA can be modified as necessary.  In the meanwhile, the area will be maintained in best possible condition for any possible future use. There should be no reason to oppose conservation interventions in Chagos just because other political agendas are not met by this badly needed conservation measure.  Indeed, conservation is greatly welcomed by most!

Is this designation binding upon the Mauritian government if and when the Territory is ceded over in the future?

It is understood there is no international law or agreement requiring them to do so. 

Why now?

Reef resources of the Indian Ocean are in steep decline.  Forty years ago, there was little difference between the condition of Chagos and many other places in the Indian Ocean.  Since then, most reef systems in that ocean have suffered damage or destruction to varying degrees.  Chagos now contains about half of the good quality reefs left in the Indian Ocean, mainly because of the absence of all the direct impacts that usually accompany communities with economic needs.  It is also a large area on the route of migratory species.  The need for Marine Protected Areas is increasing in urgency if we are to preserve the world’s oceans and meet internationally agreed targets.  Following the publication of the Chagos Environment Network’s booklet, “The Chagos: Its Nature and the Future” last April, which urged the government to consider greater protection of the area, the British government launched a consultation on the issue in November.

How will the Chagos Protected Area affect the biodiversity or productivity of surrounding areas?

Chagos is a refuge for many species.  Early evidence is hinting increasingly at a role in seeding, or in being an important stepping-stone for species, suggesting that the Chagos is directly linked to the western Indian Ocean and to Africa’s East Coast.  Chagos also serves as a reference site for many areas where such good condition is a fading memory.

Where does the military base on Diego Garcia atoll fit?

Present government documentation indicates that it may not be included in the Marine Reserve, but this is not clear yet.  That atoll contains about 1% of the reefs in the protected archipelago (and less than 1/10th of 1% of the entire area of the MPA) so its exclusion is not critical to the MPA as a whole, provided the current level of environmental protection continues on and around Diego Garcia.  Diego Garcia is already well served separately by four Strict Nature Reserves and a Ramsar site occupying over half the atoll, all of which are off limits to people and which are extraordinarily rich in reef and bird life.  The presence of the military base in Diego Garcia should not lead to decisions not to protect the very large area of important marine biodiversity. As a parallel, the presence of the Pearl Harbour military complex does not negate the Northwest Hawaiian Islands large protected area.

What infrastructure is there and how many people could return without causing damage, if return did in fact take place?

There is no infrastructure on any island other than Diego Garcia.  Clearly the sustainable number on any currently uninhabited atoll depends on how a community would sustain itself.  Several proposals have been seen for numerous externally driven and vastly expensive projects, which would not be ecologically sustainable.  Others have been proposed which fall well short of being able to provide a livelihood.

Isn’t it true that conservation with people will preserve present conditions better than conservation without people?

It is abundantly clear that a large area without people will sustain less damage by people than one containing people.  Of course, if people are already there, ignoring residents certainly leads to failure, which is why so many inhabited MPAs are only partially or minimally successful.  Chagos has been uninhabited for 40 years.  Many people have political and moral objections to the reasons why, but it is illogical to suggest that significant conservation activity should not be attempted urgently because they are uninhabited.   [NB recent coral-list posts about the exceptional quality of some marine areas in other people-exclusion zones such as nuclear test atolls and Red Sea military zones.]  The question needed is: should there be any places where depletion of the environment by humans is prohibited and, if so, where can this be done with minimal human disruption.  Does society need at least some such areas?]  This should not be taken as a value judgement of whether or not Chagos should be uninhabited.  It is not.  But the present and planned position of government is that it remains so, and this measure will add to existing protection in the meantime.

What are the economic aspects?

Using ‘Costanza (1997) values’ estimated annual values of Chagos fall between $0.5-1.5 billion, a wide range which varied with whether or not elements such as tourism was incorporated.  A current study has used a meta-analysis of just the coral reef values, and concludes that, even excluding tourism and other values related to economic activity, the Chagos’ reefs could be worth up to £8.5bn. Of course many of the values associated with Chagos are intangible and therefore hard to quantify financially, but the current study concludes that they are “potentially matched by economic values on a global scale”.

What are the costs of protection?

Protection can be achieved for the same price as currently is spent on fishery patrol, particularly if better surveillance information is made available and this is something that is being explored.  Costs are currently about $5 km², which is about 10-100 times less than for most coral reef areas with protection measures.  Provisional, working documents are available on request.

How big is it?

The Chagos Protected Area is about 544,000 sq km and will comprise 16% of the world’s fully protected coral reefs and 40% of the world’s effectively protected marine areas, doubling the amount of no-take marine protected area in the world.  It is the biggest Marine Reserve in the world at the moment.  But, given the need, several others hopefully will overtake it – the oceans and people need this, given the current dismal trend of decline and decay.

Many of us hope that this MPA creation will give encouragement to the general cause of conservation.  It is the dire state of much of the rest of the ocean - as much as it is the good condition of Chagos - that requires this archipelago to remain in the best condition possible.  It is of course the people of the Indian Ocean who will suffer if the dire condition of the ocean’s ecosystems cannot be reversed.