Perceived livelihood outcomes of the potential loss of access to fish and harvest for livelihoods and subsistence were varied, ranging from that the NMP would (a) have no impact on incomes or households if the rules were not enforced to (b) concerns that the loss of rights to fish and harvest would result in increased poverty, decreased well-being, increased conflict, and declining food security. Participants from near Koh Ra-Ko Phrathong NMP often discussed the example of Mu Koh Surin MNP where the DNP stopped the traditional Moken community from fishing and harvesting in the area without providing other livelihoods options. They felt that this had made traditional local fishers into criminals: “They have to steal from the sea to make a living. They have lived there for 10 generations, but they have no choice…Everything they do is illegal, they cannot even collect seashells in their own home. They become worthless.” Participants discussed arrests that had happened in the past and were apprehensive that this would continue to happen. Both in the communities and amongst NGO and academic representatives, there was a deep sense of injustice that “poor”, “local”, “traditional”,and“small-scale” fishing and gleaning practices would be excluded from the area. In Koh Rah-Koh Phrathong NMP, this had lead locals to protest the creation of the NMP and to burn down the national parks office.