Defining fishing grounds based on data from vessel monitoring systems (VMS) has been a widely researched topic in recent years. Much of the research has focused on filtering algorithms for ...identifying fishing locations from VMS point data, most often supplemented with either imputed or reported vessel speed information. This study compared the precision of categorizing fishing locations from VMS data either by the most wide-spread “speed rule” approach or by a probability model. Using data from Northeast U.S. Fisheries for fishing years 2010–2014, we showed that the traditional representation of fishing activities as derived by speed rules leads to a severe misrepresentation of fishing grounds for gears other than bottom otter trawl. Predictions based on probability models outperformed gear-specific speed rules in classifying VMS polls for sink gillnet and scallop dredge trips, without adding substantial computational effort. The probability models thus provide the largest improvements in gears with complicated fishing patterns, while controlling for issues such as fleet dynamics that historically have not been dealt with in the static speed rules but which can have significant impacts on the quality of predictions.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract Marine ecosystem-based management (EBM) is recognized as the best practice for managing multiple ocean-use sectors, explicitly addressing tradeoffs among them. However, implementation is ...perceived as challenging and often slow. A poll of over 150 international EBM experts revealed progress, challenges, and solutions in EBM implementation worldwide. Subsequent follow-up discussions with over 40 of these experts identified remaining impediments to further implementation of EBM: governance; stakeholder engagement; support; uncertainty about and understanding of EBM; technology and data; communication and marketing. EBM is often portrayed as too complex or too challenging to be fully implemented, but we report that identifiable and achievable solutions exist (e.g., political will, persistence, capacity building, changing incentives, and strategic marketing of EBM), for most of these challenges and some solutions can solve many impediments simultaneously. Furthermore, we are advancing in key components of EBM by practitioners who may not necessarily realize they are doing so under different paradigms. These findings indicate substantial progress on EBM, more than previously reported.
Fishery managers worldwide are evaluating methods for incorporating climate, habitat, ecological, social, and economic factors into current operations in order to implement Ecosystem Approaches to ...Fishery Management (EAFM). While this can seem overwhelming, it is possible to take practical steps towards EAFM implementation that make use of existing information and provide managers with valuable strategic advice. Here, we describe the process used by the U.S. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) to develop an ecosystem-level risk assessment, the initial step proposed in their recently adopted EAFM guidance document. The Council first defined five types of Risk Elements (ecological, economic, social, food production, management) and identified which management objectives aligned with each element. Based on an existing ecosystem status report for the region and other existing sources (including expert opinion), potential ecological, social, economic, and management indicators were identified for each risk element. Finally, low, low-moderate, moderate-high, and high risk criteria were defined for each indicator, and the indicator data were used to score each risk element using the criteria. The ultimate outcome is a ranked risk assessment in order to focus on the highest risk issues for further evaluation and mitigation. The risk assessment highlights certain species and certain management issues as posing higher cumulative risks to meeting Council management objectives when considering a broad range of ecological, social, and economic factors. Tabular color coded summaries of risk assessment results will be used by the Council to prioritize further EAFM analyses as well as research plans over the coming five years. As ecosystem reporting and operational EAFM continue to evolve in future years, the Council foresees integrating these efforts so that ecosystem indicators are refined to meet the needs of fishery managers in identifying and managing risks to achieving ecological, social, and economic fishery objectives. Overall, ecosystem indicator-based risk assessment is a method that can be adapted to a wide range of resource management systems and available information, and therefore represent a promising way forward in the implementation of EAFM.
Abstract
Managers, stakeholders, and scientists recognize the need for collaborative, transparent, integrated approaches to complex resource management issues, and frameworks to address these complex ...issues are developing. Through the course of 2019, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council developed a conceptual model of ecosystem linkages and risks for summer flounder, a species of recreational and commercial fisheries importance. The proximal aim of the model was to develop a list of integrated management questions that could be refined and addressed through a future quantitative management strategy evaluation. As such, this conceptual model served as a scoping tool. However, the true value of the conceptual model lays elsewhere: familiarizing resource managers historically focused on single-species management with the potential utility of an ecosystem approach to management. This paper details the goals and development of the conceptual model and situates this process in the broader context of best practices for collaborative open science and scientific reproducibility. Further, it highlights a successful path by which the shift towards ecosystem-based management can be actuated.
Abstract
While the science supporting fisheries management has generally been dominated by the natural sciences, there has been a growing recognition that managing fisheries essentially means ...managing economic systems. Indeed, over the past seven decades, economic ideas and insights have increasingly come to play a role in fisheries management and policy. As an illustration of this, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has been actively seeking to expand the scope of its scientific expertise beyond natural sciences another inter-governmental marine science organization which has done this over the same period is the North Pacific Marine Science organization (PICES). In particular, the recently created ICES Working Group on Economics set out to review current work and key future needs relating to economic research and management advice on marine capture fisheries. This article presents the results of this review and addresses how economic research can be incorporated into the science of ICES to provide integrated perspectives on fisheries systems that can contribute to the provision of advice in support of policy development and management decision-making for sustainable uses of living marine resources.
Marine ecosystems are characterized by many complex interactions. Fisheries managers face the challenge of maintaining or restoring sustainability for individual living resources which are affected ...by both ecological and economic interactions with other species, through processes like predation and fishing fleet interactions. These species interactions are further complicated by interactions with habitats that are changing due to both human activities and climate change. Often, fishery management systems designed to promote sustainability of individual resources have few tools or processes that also address interactions between species, fleets, habitat, and climate. Here, we review existing and potential fishery assessment and management information and tools, and we develop a potential framework for addressing interactions in management at the request of the U.S. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The structured framework can be used to first prioritize interactions, second specify key questions regarding high priority interactions, and third tailor appropriate analyses to address them. The primary tools for the initial steps in the framework are risk assessment and Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE). Finally, implemented management would be evaluated to ensure that objectives are being met, or to adjust measures as conditions change. In the final section, we outline an example to illustrate how a structured decision making process within the framework could work.
PDF
