Embargoed for release until 3 p.m. EDT Thursday, May 27. "No-take zones" in coastal waters could reduce the effects of fishing and better preserve biodiversity in the world's oceans, and yet actually yield the same industry harvest as current fishing-control methods, say two UC Davis environmental researchers. Using simple mathematical models, the scientists show that setting aside a portion of coastal waters as zones where fishing is prohibited -- creating "no-take" marine reserves -- can produce a sustainable yield. That yield would equal the harvest from the current practice, which allows the industry to take a fixed percentage of the available fishery stock. In their paper, to be published this week in the journal Science, authors Alan Hastings and Louis Botsford conclude that managing through reserves can net the fishing industry a sustainable catch identical to the maximum yield under traditional management. Until now fishing industry groups, fearing reduced takes, have been wary of such marine reserves that have been proposed to remedy overfishing and preserve marine biodiversity, Hastings and Botsford say. But the researchers say that reserves can work as well as traditional fisheries management, particularly for populations composed of sedentary adults and widely dispersed larvae -- species which include sea urchins, Dungeness crab and lobsters -- that might otherwise not have a chance to reproduce. The researchers note the reserves could work to thwart local pressures to increase the allowable catch, thus averting more rapid depletion of the fish population. Such reserves would also be easier to enforce than current quota and size limits. Management through reserves also would simplify the current need to constantly assess stock, they say. At present, few such "no-take" marine reserves exist, the researchers say, citing examples in Chile and South Africa. While California has marine reserves, none at present are "no-take" zones, the researchers say. "There's been an inertia to this idea. People thought there would be less efficient management with reserves. But this way, you just divide up the coast, with fishing allowed here, but not there," Botsford says. "With the reserves, there's less uncertainty in predictions of what you can catch," Hastings says.