Fisheries Management Fa 08: Difference between revisions
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
A study done by the University of Bergen (Norway) examined three performance criteria: average yield, variability in yield, and risk of biomass depletion below minimum acceptable level. The authors note that fisheries managers, fisherman, and other stakeholders would value each of these criteria quite differently. The study also makes an important conclusion: that up-to-date stock surveys in addition to accurate data on biological variation of an ecosystem or fish population are absolutely necessary for the development of an effective HCR. (see “Evaluation of Harvest Control Rules: Simple One-Parameter vs. Complex Multi-Parameter Strategies”) | A study done by the University of Bergen (Norway) examined three performance criteria: average yield, variability in yield, and risk of biomass depletion below minimum acceptable level. The authors note that fisheries managers, fisherman, and other stakeholders would value each of these criteria quite differently. The study also makes an important conclusion: that up-to-date stock surveys in addition to accurate data on biological variation of an ecosystem or fish population are absolutely necessary for the development of an effective HCR. (see “Evaluation of Harvest Control Rules: Simple One-Parameter vs. Complex Multi-Parameter Strategies”) | ||
='''Promising Management Intiatives'''= | |||
='''Case Study: Overfishing of the Grand Banks'''= | ='''Case Study: Overfishing of the Grand Banks'''= |
Revision as of 23:04, 29 November 2008
Environmental Economics Fa 08 | DDT Fa 08 | Trade and the Environment Fa 08 | Local Water Quality Fa 08 | Agriculture in Cumberland Co Fa 08 | LEED, Efficiency Standards, and Risk Fa 08 | Fisheries Management Fa 08 | Food and Pesticides Fa 08
Fisheries Management
Fisheries management can be defined as a system of rules and regulations which guide governmental management of selected fish stocks within 200 miles of their respective coastlines. The increase in governments’ interest in developing responsible and effective management techniques for fisheries has evolved as a direct response to severe overfishing. Governments have sought to install monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) programs to protect fishing stocks and fisheries which have exhibited a decline in biodiversity, marginal catch rates, or species collapse. To clarify, MCS and fisheries management are not the same, there is a great deal of overlap, however, MCS is often used as a model which is built upon to direct more effective fisheries management initiatives.
The UN Food and Agricultural Organization has been a dominant force in soliciting the input of experts and disseminating their publications which prescribe guidelines for fishery management. In a recent technical paper titled "Recent Trends in Monitoring, Control and Surveillance for Capture Fisheries," the FAO defined the dimensions of fisheries management as:
Data collection and analysis
Data for management planning and operations gathered from:
Socio-economic studies, rural development studies, fisheries population studies, fisheries research cruises, licensing (national, provincial and district), catch logbooks, onboard observers, dockside monitoring, satellite vessel monitoring system, satellite imaging, inspections at sea and in port...etc
Participatory management planning
Planning fisheries management policies and strategies at the national level. Also, soliciting input from stakeholders (provinces, districts and fishers) when planning management zones or areas.
Establishing a regulatory framework
The management plans must be supported by legal instruments to ensure effective implementation. These legal instruments detail all the control mechanisms available for fisheries management including, but not limited to: Input, Operation, and Output Controls.
Input controls
Limiting:
number of fishers, number of vessels by fishery, licences, open/closed seasons, gear, vessel dimensions, area fished, and vessel identification
Operational and output controls
Establishing:
species and catch limits, by-catch limits, reporting requirements, air surveillance, sea patrols/inspections, logbooks, dockside monitoring, observers, port inspections, and accurate/up to date catch documentation
Implementation
-participatory community-based management
-"preventive" MCS activities to encourage voluntary compliance
-public awareness and education campaigns
-assistance to small scale fishers for supplemental livelihood development to reduce coastal area pressures
-full enforcement to ensure compliance by those minority of fishers that persist in ignoring the law
(see "Recent Trends in Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Systems for Caputre Fisheries")
Defining the Problem: Overfishing
Overfishing results from fishing operations which result in a reduction of fish stocks below a certain "acceptable" level. This "acceptable" level can be defined within two parameters.
Economic/bio-economic overfishing:
Occurs when resource rent (in this case fish stocks) experiences a negative marginal growth; fish stocks are being depleted at a rate which negatively affects profitability of fishermen.
Biological overfishing:
Occurs when mortality of a fished species reaches a level where stock biomass experiences negative marginal growth; if too many fish are removed then breeding slows down and can eventually experience a complete failure.
Tragedy of the Commons
As an open access resource, many fisheries fall victim to the tragedy of the commons dilemma. Without the ability to limit access competition between fishermen for fish stocks intensifies. This increase in competition leads to increases in capital investment in fishing technology in an atempt to boost productivity: this is highly detrimental to both fishing stocks and individual fisher profitability.
Harvest Control Rule (HCR)
Harvest control rules are a set of rules used for determining annual catch quotas. More “traditional” harvesting techniques like constant harvest rate or fixed quota are HCRs which have only one control parameter:
Constant harvest rate – target harvest rate
Fixes quota – target catch
More “complex” HCRs include more than one parameter.
HCRs are difficult to develop as a result of varying values of participants in fishing activities.
A study done by the University of Bergen (Norway) examined three performance criteria: average yield, variability in yield, and risk of biomass depletion below minimum acceptable level. The authors note that fisheries managers, fisherman, and other stakeholders would value each of these criteria quite differently. The study also makes an important conclusion: that up-to-date stock surveys in addition to accurate data on biological variation of an ecosystem or fish population are absolutely necessary for the development of an effective HCR. (see “Evaluation of Harvest Control Rules: Simple One-Parameter vs. Complex Multi-Parameter Strategies”)
Promising Management Intiatives
Case Study: Overfishing of the Grand Banks
Background Information
The Grand Banks are located on the North American Continental Shelf just off the coast of Newfoundland. The Banks are actually hundreds of underwater plateaus which range in depth from around 80 feet to around 300 feet, making it a relatively shallow area. The cold Labrador Current mixes with the warm Gulf Stream bringing nutrients to the surface and creating an incredibly productive and diverse ecosystem. Marine life abounds on the plateau floors, in the water column, as well as near to the surface. The roughly 280,000 km the Grand Banks covers is a vital feeding, spawning, and nursing area for many shellfish and fish species. These species include: Atlantic cod, haddock, capelin, Atlantic halibut, redfish (ocean perch), Greenland halibut (turbot), yellowtail and witch flounder, American plaice, crab, shrimp and scallop. The area also supports large colonies of sea birds and various sea mammals such as seals, dolphins and whales. (see "Backgrounder: The Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap")
History of the Grand Banks
Early European Explorers recorded that the waters were so rich with fish that you could lower a basket into the water and bring it up full of cod. From this point on thousands of people turned to Newfoundland in hopes of reaping the benefits of these rich waters. Small inshore boats took sustainable amounts of cod for centuries up to the 1950s. All of this changed for the worse as more and more people came in the 1950s. Due to technological advances in trawler design and power on the factory whaling ships, the last remaining whale populations were devastated as a result. With huge nets these trawlers could haul up seemingly endless quantities of fish. They were able to quickly process and deep-freeze the catch allowing them to work even faster than desired. It got to a point that in an hour, they can haul up as much as 200 tons of fish, Nearly double the amount as a typical 16th century ship would have caught in an entire season.
The cod catch steadily increased to 800,000 tons in 1968, which was the peak of the unsustainable catches. By 1975 the annual catch had fallen by more than 60 percent and has continued to drop ever since. Catches of other fish have fallen as a result of this over fishing. This decline eventually forced Canada to extend its fishing limit for foreign vessels from 12 miles to 200 miles from its coast.
Collapse of the Cod Fishery
works Consulted
1. The Downturn of the Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua) in Eastern Canada What is happening to these fish, and why? by Debbie MacKenzie, November, 2002
2. Watkins, Thayer: The Collapse of the Cod Fishery of the Grand Banks, San Jose University Department of Economics, 2008