Ecosystem conservation was an effort to protect, to preserve, and to utilize the ecosystem function as the supporting habitat for the living of fish resources either for recent or future days (Adams et al, 2004). Indeed, ecosystem conservation was realized through the protection of habitat and population of the fish, the research and development, the utilization of fish resource and environmental service, the development of community socio-economic, the supervision and control, and/or the monitoring and evaluation. Community-based conservation and its development became a new paradigm either for the government or non-government organization with great engagement within conservation activity (Browder, 2002; Gjertsen, 2005). Great complexity was apparent when the question whether the conservation had achieved the expectation should be answered because the achievement was always related to the utilization rate of human (Jackson and Sala, 2001; Stachowitsch, 2003; Halpern et al, 2008). Human resource has very big effect in the coastal ecosystem. The conflict of human activities only gave simultaneous pressure and exploitation against coastal natural resources (Crain et al., 2008; Darling and Côté, 2008; Doak et al., 2008; Halpern et al., 2008).
A method for effective management of coastal and sea resources was by developing Waters Conservation Area (KKP). This method involved allocating some proportions of coast and sea areas to be used as the protection site for important resource, such as for good site for spawning and breeding. The zoning plan of Waters Conservation Area was aligned with Act No.31 of 2004 but revised by Act No. 45 of 2009 about Fishery, and also complying with Government Regulation No. 60 of 2007 about Fish Resource Conservation. Both laws explained that KKP zoning consisted of core zone, sustainable fishery zone, utilization zone, and other zone. For specific cases, there were sub-zones which remained as part of these four main zones but its determination was always based on potential, characteristic and socio-economical consideration of local community.
Southeast Aru Area represented a conservation area in Indonesia. This area was stated as conservation area based on the survey result of biophysical and socio-economical potentials. This survey showed that this area must be retained because it had endemic resources which should be protected, including turtle, dugong, crocodile, and its ecosystem diversity. To understand the relationship between human pressure and ecosystem status in the area, it was very important to develop spatial and zoning plans (Douvere, 2008). It seemed difficult to understand the relationship between human activity and ecosystem status because of (1) pressure rate against ecosystem (Shears dan Ross, 2010) and (2) limited fundamental information about ecosystem in relation to its status and impact potential (Halpern et al, 2008; Fraschetti et al, 2009).
For full text: click here
(Author: Fernando D.W, Dangeubun, B. Wiryawan, Mustarudin Mustarudin, A. Purbayanto, J. M. S. Tetelepta