The ‘SLOSS’ debate—Single Large Or Several Small protected
areas—remains unresolved. We used a heuristic model based on population
dynamics of Caribbean spiny lobster in Exuma Sound, Bahamas, to compare
impacts of regional reserve designs that configured 20% of available
coastal habitat as either a randomly located single large reserve or a network
of six small, randomly located reserves on three performance indicators
(fishery yield, larval production, population growth rate) for a
hypothetical overexploited lobster population. Two
additional management strategies were considered: one reduced effort by
20% (without protected areas), and one did nothing. Effects were
evaluated for two levels of hydrodynamic variability. In general, performance
indicators ranked the management strategies, independent of hydrodynamic
variability, from best to worst in the order (1) single large reserve (2)
several small reserves (3) reduced effort (4) no management action, but
differences were not always significant. Therefore, for the model regional
system investigated here, a single large reserve is preferable to several
small ones. We propose that this conservation strategy is most suitable at the
regional scale (~100s of kilometres) and that such single, large regional
reserves would function most effectively within a broadscale (~1000s of
kilometres) reserve network, barring local catastrophes.