The benefits of implementing no-take Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) for the conservationof highly migratory species are not easy to assess. They depend on several factors, suchas the fish mobility, fisher behaviour and the area covered by the MPA with respect to thedistribution area of the species to protect. In this study, we explore the simultaneouseffects of MPAs and fishing scenarios on skipjack tuna population dynamics, using thespatially-explicit APECOSM-E model. The model represents the size-structured populationdynamics of skipjack tuna in the Indian Ocean and their dependence on climatic variabilityand exploitation by fisheries. Numerical experiments were run from the beginning ofindustrial fisheries in the early 1980s to the year 2030, considering different scenariosfor the future development of fisheries. These scenarios combined different trends infishing effort and technological development, either assuming a continuous increasefollowing historical trends or a stabilization of these factors at present values. Thesimulations were designed to explore the effects of two MPAs of different size andlocation: the recently established Chagos MPA, and a hypothetical MPA covering a largepart of the Western Indian Ocean, where most of the skipjack catches are presently made.We modelled the redistribution of fishing effort around the MPAs assuming that the fishershad partial knowledge of the spatial distribution of the skipjack population. The effectsof the two MPAs on the population dynamics, catch and fishing mortality are shown. Ourresults revealed a very minor effect of the Chagos MPA on the skipjack tuna population,while the Western Indian Ocean MPA had an important impact on the fishing mortality andsucceeded in stabilizing the spawning population. The simulations also showed that theeffect of an MPA depends on the evolution of fisheries and it is therefore important toexplore different fishery scenarios to assess the future benefits of an MPA.

Time-area closures have become a frequently used tool to control fishing effort and protect feeding and spawning areas. However, because time-area closure strata are mainly based on biological and ecological considerations, and do not accounts for fishermen’s behavior-at-sea, this type of regulation tool may not entirely achieve its objectives. With the aim of comparing the impact of two different time-area regulations: (1) a moratorium on Fish Aggregating Devices (FAD) sets (1997–2005) and (2) a no-take area for surface fleets (2005–2010) on the dynamics of the European (EU) tuna purse seine fleet operating in the eastern tropical Atlantic, several fishery indicators were evaluated through a Before-After, Control-Impact (BACI) approach. The results showed that prior to any regulation, the fleet used to be concentrated within the Gulf of Guinea area. During the first years of the moratorium on FAD (from November to January within a large region in the eastern Atlantic) there was a movement towards outside the protected area, increasing the total sets on FAD (restricted fishing activity). In general, this moratorium fulfilled its objectives; however, it was not respected during the last years of this regulation. The no-take time-area closure restricted all tuna catches for the surface fisheries but only in November and within a small area (i.e., the Picolo zone). As a result, there was an increase in activities on free schools outside the no-take area. Our findings suggest the use of some simple fishery indicators to understand fleet dynamics as a complement of ecological information before implementing new time area closures. Furthermore, since tunas are highly mobile species, anticipating the possible re-allocation of effort of purse seiners to adjacent areas in response to the spatial regulation is required to design different candidate time-area closures and to evaluate their effectiveness to protect juvenile tunas.