This time the United Nations is saying size matters. According a Reuters article, the UN says smaller marine conservation areas are more effective than larger ones. Not sure I got that memo. If it's true, that's great, but so far the research and science seem incomplete.
Plus, the reasoning for proposing small marine areas seems flawed. The scientist in the study says "Closing big zones can be excessive for conservation and alienate fishermen who then ignore bans." Who's to say fishermen won't ignore the smaller bans, too?
In general, the phrase "excessive for conservation" is a little troublesome, a little passive aggressive. Since when do conservation efforts even approach excessive? We certainly have shown that, if anything, we humans are very capable of excess for everything but conservation. Personally, I'd like to err on the side of excessive for conservation than the alternative. Let's keep an eye on this one.
Read more here.