BHS MPA101 Mod4 Fisheries Revised6

FISHERIES IN BIRD’S HEAD SEASCAPE
MODULE 4
MPAs and FISHERIES IN

THE BIRD’S HEAD
SEASCAPE
MODULE 4
4.1 THE ORIGINS OF FISHING
Traditional Use of Fisheries

Traditional Fisheries Controls
4.2 FISHERIES IN CRISIS
Trends in Global Catch

Are the World’s Oceans Overfished?
4.3 IMPACTS FROM FISHING
Types of Overfishing
Effects on Target Populations
Unpredictability of Ecosystem Changes
Shifting Baselines
Fishing Methods and Gear Types in Bird’s Head Seascape
4.4 FISHERIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR THE BIRD’S HEAD SEASCAPE
Three Basic Goals of Fisheries Management

Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management
Prioritizing Fisheries Management Issues
A Review of Practical Management Strategies and Tools
0
MODULE 4
Specific Management Considerations for Different Habitats

Zonal Management
Assessment
1
FISHERIES IN BIRD'S HEAD SEASCAPE
MODULE 4
4.5 RESPONSIBLE MARICULTURE
Common Mariculture Practices

Problems of Mariculture
2
Acknowledgements
The majority of the following material is excerpted or modified from:
Adams, T.; P. Dalzell; and R. Farman. 1996. Status of Pacific Island Coral Reef Fisheries, Paper
presented at 8th International Coral Reef Symposium, Panama.
http://www.spc.int/Coastfish/Reports/ICFMAP/statreef.htm.
Bell, F.W. 1997. Economic Valuation of Saltwater Marsh Supporting Marine Recreational Fishing
in the Southeastern United States. Ecological Economics 21(1): 243-254.
Birkeland, C., and A. M. Friedlander. 2001. The Importance of Refuges for Reef Fish
Replenishment in Hawai'i. Hawaii Audubon Society and Pacific Fisheries Coalition, Honolulu,
Hawaii. 19p.
Carson R.T., R.C. Mitchell, M. Haneman, R. J. Kopp, S. Presser and P.A. Rudd. 1995. Contingent
Valuation and Lost Passive Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez. Discussion paper 95-02,
University of California, Department of Economics, San Diego, California.
Cinner, J., M. J. Marnane, T. R. McClanahan, and G. R. Almany 2005. Periodic closures as

adaptive coral reef management in the Indo-Pacific. Ecology and Society 11(1): 31. [online]
Accessed 07/20/2009 URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art31/
Dalzell, P. 1998. The Role of Archaeological and Cultural-Historical Records in Long-Range

Coastal Fisheries Resources Management Strategies and Policies in the Pacific Islands. Ocean
and Coastal Management 40 (2). p. 237-252(16). Elsevier.
Dalzell, P. and T.J.H Adams. 1997. Sustainability and Management of Reef Fish Fisheries in the
Pacific Islands. Proc. Eighth Int. Coral Reef Symp.
Dayton, P. K., S. Thrush, and F. C. Coleman. 2002. Ecological Effects of Overfishing in Marine
Ecosystems of the United States. PEW Oceans Commission.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
of the Department of Agriculture, and Department of the Interior and Local Government. 2001.
Philippine Coastal Management Guidebook No. 6 Managing Municipal Fisheries. Coastal
Resource Management Project of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Cebu
City, Philippines. (PH-6, 2001) www.oneocean.org.
Dyer, C. L. and J. R. McGoodwin. 1994. Folk Management in the World's Fisheries: Lessons for
Modern Fisheries Management. University Press of Colorado, Denver, Colorado.
FAO 2004. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA). Accessed July 22, 2009.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5600e/y5600e04.htm#P3_111
FAO 2006. State of World Aquaculture. Fisheries Technical Paper 500. Rome. Accessed
06/29/2009. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0874e/a0874e00.pdf
Hardin, G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science Vol. 162, No. 3859 (December 13) pp.
1243-1248.
IUCN. 2004. Managing Marine Protected Areas: A TOOLKIT for the Western Indian Ocean, IUCN
Eastern African Regional Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. p. 172. www.wiomsa.org.
MODULE 4
MacKinnon, N. Destructive Fishing Practices in the Asia-Pacific Region, ICRI Panel 1:

Destructive Fishing Practices, http://www.icriforum.org/docs/14235P1.pdf.
Iverson, E. S. 1996. Living Marine Resources: Their Utilization And Management. Chapman and
Hall, New York.
Ministry of Fisheries and The World Bank. 2005. Vietnam Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector
Study. Final Report. Accessed on 07/01/2009.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTVIETNAM/Resources/vn_fisheries-report-final.pdf
NOAA. 2004. Large Marine Ecosystem 36: South China Sea. Accessed on 2/11/08.
http://na.nefsc.noaa.gov/lme/text/lme36.htm.
Palumbi, S.R. 2002. Marine Reserves, A Tool for Ecosystem Management and Conservation.
Pew Oceans Commission Report.
Pew Oceans Commission (2003) America’s Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change,
Philadelphia, PA: Pew Charitable Trust, May.
Pikitch, E.K., C. Santora, E.A. Babacock, A. Bakun, R. Bonfil,D.O. Conover, P. Dayton, P.

Doukakis, D. Fluharty, B. Heneman, E.D. Houde, J. Link, P.A. Livingston, M. Managel, M.K.
McAllister, J. Pope, K. J. Sainsbury. 2004 Ecosystem Based Fishery Management. Science 305:
5682 pp. 346-347.
Sea Around Us Project. 2008. Access on 2/11/08.

http://www.seaaroundus.org/TrophicLevel/LMETaxon.aspx?lme=36&fao=0&Name=South
%20China%20Sea&typeOut=4
Worm, B. E.B. Bargier, N. Beaumont, J.E. Duffy, C. Folke, B.S. Halpern, J.B.C. Jackson, H.K.
Lotze, F. Micheli, S.R. Palumib, E.Sala, D.A. Selkoe, J.J. Stachowica, R. Watson. 2006. Impacts
of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science, 314: 787
WWF/ IUCN. 1998. Creating a Sea Change - The WWF/IUCN Marine Policy. The World Wildlife
Fund for Nature and the World Conservation Union. Accessed 06/30/2009.
http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/marine/marine_resources/?1605/Creating-a-Sea-
Change-The-WWF-IUCN-Marine-Policy
1
MODULE 4
OVERVIEW

To make effective management decisions, MPA managers need to know the basics of fisheries
management - how fish stocks respond to fishing effort, and the specific effects of particular
fishing techniques used in the local area.
Since fishes are a common resource generally available to all, fisheries are particularly
susceptible to the "Tragedy of the Commons" - the overexploitation of a common resource. Any
fish stock can only sustain a given level of fishing pressure before catch will start to decline due to
overfishing. Throughout the Bird’s Head Seascape Region, most fish stocks are currently
overfished. This means that most non-commercial fishers can only catch relatively small numbers
of poor-quality fish, despite increased fishing effort with intensive fishing methods and gear. This
situation can trap fishers and sometimes entire communities in poverty.
If fishing effort can be reduced, fish stocks can and will recover from overfishing, often in just a
few years in tropical areas. Methods of reducing overfishing include restrictions on fishing
methods or gear, zoning, licensing, and more. But for these efforts to be successful, they must
have the support of local fisher people. In particular, local fisher people must have other ways of
earning income while the fish stocks are recovering.
This module is designed to help you review your current understanding of, and acquire additional
knowledge of, the ecological and biological factors that affect fish population size, fish catch, and
the impacts of different fishing methods and mariculture methods on fish stocks.
IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT SKILLS
To make effective management decisions, and to advise local communities in ways that will
strengthen fish stocks and benefit fisher people and the local environment, a MPA manager
needs to understand the relationship of fish stocks to fishing pressure, the relationship of fish
stocks to the local environment, and the impacts of fishing methods, gear and mariculture.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
 Understand and review the factors that affect fish population size and fish catch.
 Learn why fish stocks are particularly vulnerable to overfishing.
2
MODULE 4
 Consider the impacts of different fishing methods, gear, and mariculture on fish stocks;
and share your knowledge of how these methods are practiced in the Bird’s Head
Seascape.
LINKS TO OTHER CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAMS
Zonal Management
Some of the most effective methods of fisheries management are based on dividing the marine
ecosystem into zones for different uses. MPAs, of course, are one type of zone.
Community-based Management
All fisheries management decisions need to involve the local community. Restriction of fishing
methods and gear, zoning, and other management methods will only be successful if local fisher
people understand and believe in the methods. Involvement of the local community is particularly
important during the recovery period when fishing effort may be dramatically reduced or when a
new zone has just been put into place. In the Pacific, most fisher people face the constant
pressures of poverty, which make it necessary for the MPA manager to consider alternative
livelihood strategies for displaced or compromised fisher people.
Management Planning
MPA managers must understand the basic concepts of fish populations, fishing methods and
gears, and mariculture. But understanding is not enough to cause changes. Translating the
concepts into creative, effective actions requires management planning and careful examination
of alternatives.
Enforcement
All fisheries management involves regulations - zones, licenses, restrictions on fishing gear, etc.
But regulations will only be effective if fisher people actually comply with the regulations.
Education and outreach to explain the reasons for regulations as well as on-the-water
enforcement skills are necessary to ensure that regulations actually are followed.
Sustainable Tourism
Tourism can be an excellent alternative source of income for the local fisher population, either
temporarily (while overfished stocks are recovering) or permanently. But tourism itself can cause
its own impacts, so should be carefully evaluated before implemented as an alternative livelihood.
3
MODULE 4
INDICATORS OF EFFECTIVE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT KNOWLEDGE
A MPA manager should have a good working knowledge of the general relationship of fish stock
size to fishing effort, and the general causes of overfishing. In addition, a MPA manager must
have working knowledge of specific fishing gear, fishing methods, and mariculture methods that
are commonly used in his or her local area, and should also know why the local people have
chosen to use those methods rather than others. A MPA manager should know which of these
fishing methods and gears are particularly aggressive in reducing fish stocks; destructive to the
seafloor, reef, or other habitats; and understand how these methods could best be regulated to
ensure healthy fish stocks, sufficient income for fisher people, and a healthy environment.
Assessing what you have learned about Fisheries Issues

At the end of this Management Capacity Training Program, you will talk with your team members
about the different habitats of the Bird’s Head Seascape and how they are related, the fishing and
aquaculture methods used in the Pacific, and the fish stocks which might be overfished.
Long-term indicators of a good understanding of Fisheries Issues

A MPA manager who stays well-informed on fisheries issues will:
 Understand how removal of one fish stock or one habitat can affect other fish species and
other habitats; be better prepared for possible ecosystem changes.
 Be aware of new fishing methods or gear used by local people; recognize and take steps
to reduce use of particularly destructive methods and gear.
 Be aware of new local mariculture and how it affects the surrounding environment.
 Continually monitor the local fisheries for signs of overfishing. This may require gathering
regular information on catch size, size of individual fishes, and fishing effort.
4
MODULE 4
LESSON PLAN
4.1 THE ORIGINS OF FISHING
TRADITIONAL USE OF FISHERIES
Fishing is one of the most ancient and traditional ways of subsistence. All human
cultures that live along bodies of water have developed ways of harvesting fish and
extracting other resources from the sea. The marine environment provides us with a
surplus of riches - not just food, but also materials such as leather, fibers, building
materials, minerals, and even drugs and medicines. The marine environment has also
increasingly been a place of leisure and recreation, including swimming, snorkeling,
diving, water sports, boating, sailing, recreational fishing, and wildlife viewing.
The impacts of traditional fishing patterns have varied over time. In the past, small
human population size and simple fishing technology limited the impact of traditional
fisheries. However, surprisingly, it is now clear that even when human populations were
small, overfishing occurred frequently throughout human history. Many prehistoric
cultures had pronounced impacts on their local fish stocks, as indicated by decreases in
abundance and size of fish documented in archeological sites. For example, fish bones
found in middens on many Caribbean islands indicate a substantial decrease in size and
mean trophic level of fish starting about 1900 years ago and continuing to 600 years ago
(discussed in Birkeland and Friedlander 2002). Thus, in some locations, overfishing
occurred even before Europeans arrived, just from small-scale local fishers using
traditional gear.
Small-scale fishers still are a major factor in the world's fisheries today. It is estimated
that as many as 90% of fishers worldwide are small-scale local fishers working from
small boats close to shore (Dyer and McGoodwin 1994). These fishers always have
"very definite ideas about the marine ecosystems they exploit, and.... always have very
definite ideas about how the fisheries they work in should be managed" (Dyer and
McGoodwin 1994). MPA managers need to understand and appreciate the knowledge
and points of view of local fishers.
TRADITIONAL FISHERIES CONTROLS

Overfishing is not inevitable. Some cultures have historically discovered ways of
managing fisheries so that overfishing does not occur. For example, many traditional
fishing communities of the Pacific Islands seem to have managed fishing better than in
most of the Caribbean. Some Pacific Island communities have sustained continuous
fishing practices for an astonishing 3500 years without any detectable impact on the fish
communities (Dalzell and Adams 1997; Dalzell 1998). The Palauans and the Yapese, for
example, have strict traditional regulations that still maintain their fisheries.
5
MODULE 4
Overfishing is not inevitable if controls are effective.
Case Studies of Traditional Controls
Traditional Controls in Hawai'i
In the main Hawaiian Islands, in locations where local communities control fishing, the
catch is as high as in completely protected areas. The catch is over twice as great as in
areas that are partially protected by governmental regulations, or that do not have any
controls. Why are these cultural practices so effective?
As described in Birkeland and Friedlander (2001), the Hawaiians' traditional restrictions

on fishing were not based on quotas, but rather on times (temporal) and places (spatial)
closures so as to not interfere with spawning. Thus, areas and places where fish
reproduce were selectively protected. In addition to protection of spawning areas, certain
vulnerable species were given special protection. Before the 1800s, most of the
Hawaiian population was not allowed to eat ulua (giant Trevally), kumu (goatfish), and
honu (Hawaiian green sea turtles); in addition, moi (Pacific Threadfin) was reserved for the village
chiefs. These are all species that are especially vulnerable to overexploitation. Moi is a highly
regarded fish but its popularity has driven its population to collapse and is now seriously
overfished. The moi most Hawaiians eat today is produced by aquaculture.
The Hawaiians also maintained a strict code of conduct regarding fishing. Young fishers
were required to watch the older fisherman at work and to hold the catch, but were not
allowed to fish until they had completed several years of apprenticeship, and had
learned the history, behavior and ecology of the fish. Note also that social enforcement
of a code by a local community is usually more effective than governmental control.
Hawaiian island culture, in general, emphasized heritage, tenure, and responsible

management of resources. This may be due to the fact the Hawaiian (Polynesian)
culture evolved on small islands, where the consequences of the over-harvesting of
limited resources were obvious to everyone. Not all island cultures evolved such
effective resource management - but those island cultures that last tend to do so
because of their sustainable practices.
In recent years, these traditional controls have been disappearing. Many young
fishermen now claim a right to fish as much as they want, and wherever they want. This
is a consequence of the influence of modern American culture in the Hawaiian Islands.
American culture evolved on a vast landscape with resources that initially seemed
limitless, and it increasingly appears that it is not suited to management of limited
resources. American culture has given rise to a winner-take-all approach that benefits
the few at the expense of the many, without regard to what is best for the community or
for future generations.
6
MODULE 4
Traditional Fishing Controls in Buen Hombre, Dominican Republic
Buen Hombre is a small village on the north coast of the Dominican Republic. It is sited
in the middle of a long uninterrupted stretch of coastal mangroves, and has the most
vital and diverse reef ecosystem in the Caribbean, even though it has been intensively
fished by villagers for over 100 years. Other reef ecosystems in other Caribbean villages
have collapsed due to overfishing. Why is Buen Hombre different?
Three explanations have been proposed: Buen Hombre is isolated; it has strong social
mechanisms for controlling the population size of the village; and there is a "strong
marine conservation ethic" among the local fishers.
Fishers in Buen Hombre prefer not to fish alone. They usually go to sea each day with a
team of fellow fishers who share personal equipment, boats, and motors, which are not
personally owned by most fishers. Fishers have also organized into a voluntary fishers'
association. Young fishers must apprentice themselves in a long multi-year process
before they become master fishers. They proceed through four stages: apprentice,
journeyman, craftsman, and "beached" (a retired fisher who advises younger fishers).
Once a fisher joins the fishers' association, he accepts "social obligations and
responsibilities for educating new members, maintaining fishing equipment, looking out
for the safety and welfare of others while fishing, promoting unity, and abiding by the
locally instituted informal rules of proper fisher behavior" (from Stoffle et al., chapter 5 of
Dyer and McGoodwin 1994).
Examples of sustainable practices adopted by the Buen Hombre fishers

association include:
 Small fish are spared. Buen Hombre fishers understand the principle that small fish
should be avoided in order to allow them to grow to a larger size, and they teach this
principle to younger fishers.
 Diversity of fishing: No fisher targets just one species. Daily individual catches
include an array of parrotfish, grouper, snapper, crab, lobster, conch and others.
 Diversity of fishing sites: fishers move to a wide variety of fishing sites according to
weather fluctuations and availability of fuel. This spreads the fishing pressure across
a wide area.
 Fishers do not cut coral.
 No air compressors are allowed.
 No chinchorro nets are allowed. (Chinchorros are long drag nets and boat-cast nets)
 Mangroves are not cut.
 Education of children is seen as a priority.
 Spawning or "pregnant" (gravid) fish are not taken.
 Fishers feel a sense of ownership and responsibility for their fishing waters. They
defend it vigorously against intrusions by outsiders (see below).
 Fishers also view government officials as a helpful resource. When asked what they
do when overfishing becomes a problem, one of their strategies was "We try and
7
MODULE 4
speak with government officials."

 Most fishers also are farmers, such that they can take advantage of mixed
production (seafood and crops). This gives them an alternative livelihood to turn to in
times of fish scarcity, enabling them to refrain from overfishing during periods when
fish are under stress.
Buen Hombre fishers are not immune to the pressures of the outside world. In
interviews, local fishers almost universally agreed that the two main pressures affecting
their fishing are "chinchorros" (long drag nets and boat-cast nets) used by fishers from
other villages, particularly Monte Cristi, and air compressors that allow spear fishermen
to stay underwater longer. Buen Hombre and Monte Cristi fishers have had a number of
tense standoffs, with Buen Hombre fishers threatening to cut Monte Cristi nets, and the
Monte Cristi fishers replying that they will starve if they are prevented from using their
nets. Buen Hombre's response to this statement was that Monte Cristi fishers must bear
the consequences of having overfished their own waters. Monte Cristi fishers ultimately
attempted to set nets secretly in Buen Hombre reefs at night; in response, a group of
twenty Buen Hombre fishers went out in boats with knives (to cut nets) to patrol their
waters. The Monte Cristi fishers eventually gave up. A critical aspect of this standoff is
that Buen Hombre fishers' claims were backed up by satellite data and they were
supported by the government. This example is a vivid illustration of how effective local
fishers can be in enforcement, if they know that the enforcement will ultimately benefit
their own fish catch.
Traditional Controls Among Louisiana Oyster Fishers, US
Oystering in the southern state of Louisiana has occurred since the 1840's, when oyster
fishers from Eastern Europe first arrived. They successfully developed sustainable and
productive harvesting of the Louisiana oysters. Over the years, they developed
traditional oyster camps, which were closed communities of multi-generational oystering
families and their kin. These camps were not open to outsiders. Eventually, these
traditional family-based controls were incorporated into state law. Currently, oyster
fishers must lease the oyster beds that they work, paying for the privilege of working on
geographically defined oyster bedding grounds that had been worked for generations by
the oyster families. Those oyster fishers who lease the beds feel a sense of
custodianship and ownership of those beds, and invest much time and resources in
managing the beds. They also benefit from extensive, cooperative networks among all
the traditional oyster families. The Louisiana oyster fishery is the most productive in the
entire Gulf of Mexico (Chapter 3 of Dyer and McGoodwin 1994).
In contrast, the neighboring state of Mississippi lacks this long-standing tradition of

oyster families and long-term oyster leasing. Mississippi oyster fishers are a mix of many
different immigrant groups and local residents who are not committed to the oyster
fishery for the long-term. As a result, the oyster fishery in Mississippi has been
overfished and is not very productive. In addition, oyster catches in Mississippi are highly
variable, whereas in Louisiana they are much more stable - which, in turn, further
promotes the long-term commitment of Louisiana oyster fishers to their sustainable way
of life.
8
MODULE 4
Traditional Controls on the Island of Kakarotan, North Sulawesi, Indonesia
Kakarotan Island, in the northernmost reaches of the Sangihe-Talaud archipelago, is a

small coral cay with a population of approximately 800 people. A system of periodic reef
closures called mane’e is practiced; each year, one of nine reef areas is closed for a
period, and then opened to harvest fish for a traditional ceremony. The mane´e practice
starts with a taboo on all fishing activities within one area. The taboo generally lasts for
six months, although this can vary. Site selection and duration of the taboo are decided
during a meeting of the community’s traditional leaders. The location of the closure
frequently switched between sites from year to year. In recent years, one the largest
mane’e areas, (~ 50 ha) had been closed several times. The boundaries of this largest
area range from the shoreline to the bottom of the reef slope. During the lowest tide of a
specified month, the community collectively harvests the closed area to provide fish for a
large feast.
Rigid social factors often influenced where and when a taboo was placed. The
occurrence of an annual feast largely determined the amount of time an area was
closed, and other social factors such as whether government officials were expected to
attend the feast, influenced which area was selected for closure. However,
environmental conditions also influenced Kakarotan’s taboo, as the traditional leader
kept the area closed for an entire year during 1998-1999, coinciding with a severe El
Niño bleaching event.
Sanctions exist for violations of the taboo; a warning is given on the first offense and a
fine on the second. Most mane’e areas are clearly visible from the community, and
fishers tended to fish in groups of 10-20 canoes, thereby making it difficult for individuals
to break community rules and increasing the chance of their detection and reporting.
Over time, it was documented that the biomass and the average size of fishes were
greater inside areas subject to periodic closures compared to sites with year-round open
access (Cinner et al., 2005). This customary traditional control of marine resources is
successful because village leaders had the authority and autonomy to develop and
adapt rules to change the location and duration of the closure to reflect ecological or
social conditions. In considering where, when, and how long to implement periodic
closures, decision makers used their understanding of social-ecological systems to
interpret threshold levels of social and ecological indicators, commonly referred to as
traditional ecological knowledge.
Why Do Some Cultures Develop Such Effective Fishing Controls?
Do traditional fishing communities always develop such effective controls? Not

necessarily. For every culture that has managed to maintain its fisheries, we can point to
another that has overfished them. Often, island cultures and isolated cultures tend to
develop effective traditional controls because they have very limited resources. They had
9
MODULE 4
to learn to use those resources wisely. Island cultures that did not use their resources
sustainably, such as on Easter Island, eventually vanished. Cultures that evolved on
large continents, such as the Americas, may have to learn the islanders' conservation-
minded approach.
Another factor appears to be that in certain locations, fishers are able to get a holistic
grasp of the entire environment. For example, in eastern Canada, some local salmon
fishers only see salmon for a few weeks a year when the salmon are migrating past
those fishers' villages. Other salmon fishers in other locations encounter the salmon at
many points in the salmon life cycle: when spawning, as fry in rivers, out at sea, and
again when migrating back. Interviews with both these types of fishers showed that the
first group of fishers did not believe that the salmon stock was declining. They did not
intuitively grasp the connection between salmon size and the health of the rivers that
they spawned in, and they did not believe government official's stated reasons for
limiting the salmon catch. But the second group of fishers had a much more
comprehensive picture of the salmon's life cycle, and were aware that the salmon were
declining (Felt 1994, chapter 10 of Dyer and McGoodwin 1994).
Similarly, Maine lobstermen are famous for their voluntary commitment to sparing small
lobsters and egg-bearing lobsters. This is apparently because the Maine lobstermen
have repeatedly seen the local effects of overfishing. Lobsters are relatively sedentary,
so much so that many Maine lobsterers have personal experience of overfishing a
particular cove to the point that no lobsters were left in that cove. Through these
personal experiences, they have become convinced that their lobster population really is
under threat from overfishing, and really will benefit from controls on fishing (Palmer
1994, chapter 9 of Dyer and McGoodwin 1994).
This example shows that when fishers are able to see for themselves that the species is
truly vulnerable, they are more likely to realize that limits on fishing will ultimately benefit
their own fishing catches.
Natural Resource Communities
A local community that is heavily dependent on a certain natural resource tends to

develop a particularly keen awareness of that resource's health and state of productivity.
Such a community can be called a natural resource community (NRC). An NRC usually
uses the natural resource in a recurring annual cycle of anticipation, preparation, harvest
and utilization. The people in an NRC often cooperate intensively during the busiest
phases, and have strong social and generational bonds that pass their knowledge and
traditions on to the next generation. They often develop insular communities that are
socially closed to outsiders. These tight bonds foster a community-based approach to
use of the resource, and a sense of the importance of preserving the resource for future
generations.
10
MODULE 4
Exercise 4.1: Traditional controls in the Bird’s Head Seascape
Objective: To identify any existing traditional fisheries management regimes still in place
or reinstated in response to fishing pressures.
1. Take 10 minutes to write down any examples you know in your region in which local fishing
communities have developed long-term traditional controls on fishing resources; or have changed
their attitude or management in response to overfishing.
2. Take 30 minutes to discuss experiences with entire class. (40 minutes)
Changes in Fishing Effort and Control
Increase in Fishing Effort World-wide

As the human population has grown globally over the last century, the number of fishers
has increased too. In just 20 years, from just 1970 to 1990, the capacity of the world's
fishing fleet increased by 4.6% per year (WWF/IUCN 1998). Year by year, this has
added up to a phenomenal 155% increase in capacity in just two decades. Curiously,
much of this growth was financed by government subsidies, which have ensured an
investment in fishing far beyond sustainable levels. For example, the annual world
fishing catch is estimated to be worth between US 70-100 billion dollars, but to obtain
this, an estimated $22 billion has been spent on governmental subsidies (WWF/IUCN
1998).
It was estimated that the global fishing fleet is currently 2.5x LARGER than what the
oceans can sustainably support (Porter, 1998) - meaning that humans are taking far
more fish out of the ocean than can be replaced. While the vast majority of the world
fishing fleet remains concentrated in Asia, the growth in pre-2000 years appears to have
halted. Indications are that the fleet size of major fishing nations continues to decrease.
More recently, the total world trade of fish and fishery products has been stagnant in the
last few years following decades of increases (FAO, 2004). These changes in fishing
effort can be further indication of overexploitation and these impacts of declining fish
catches are being painfully felt by many coastal fishing communities around the world
(see Estimated Status of the World’s Fisheries).
Advances In Fishing Technology

In addition to the increase in number of boats and fishers, there has been a
corresponding increase in the sophistication of fishing gear and technology. It is
estimated that the "technical capacity," or ability to catch fish, of the world's fishing fleet
has increased four-fold between 1965 and 1995. Major advances have included ship-
based radar to detect large schools of fish, spotter planes, and satellite imagery. Catch
11
MODULE 4
technology has also increased, with nets generally being longer and deeper than before.
Bottom-trawlers now have the capacity to rake larger tracts of deeper ocean floor than
they did a few decades ago. The availability of cheaper nets, smaller mesh sizes of nets
and creative (but often destructive) new technologies (i.e., blast fishing, poisons) have
also increased the pressure on habitats and fishing areas. These high-intensity
techniques are typically the last resort of coastal fishers who have been forced or driven
to use "desperate technology" as a last-ditch effort to obtain enough to eat from an
overfished area.
Case Study - Monofilament Gill Nets: One example of a change in fishing technology
is the efficient manufacture of inexpensive monofilament gill nets, which are now
produced so cheaply that they are essentially disposable. As a result, fishers can lay
very long gill nets in new areas and in deeper water than they could previously, while not
being unduly troubled by the occasional loss of a gill net. Several long gill nets can be
connected together to form long walls that catch anything that runs into them. These
nets frequently get caught on coral and can destroy habitat, in addition to catching non-
target species such as sea turtles and seals. Finally, abandoned and lost gill nets can
"ghost-fish" for years, drifting through the water and killing everything that runs into
them.
Demise of Natural Refuges By Technology

Advancements in fishing technology have made it so much easier to catch fish that the
fish are not always protected by "natural refuges". A change in technology can give
fishers access to times and places where they previously did not fish. For example,
when traditional gear was used to catch fish, fish could usually escape by swimming fast
or to deeper water. In addition, most fish were able to sleep safely at night in the depths.
Case Study - SCUBA fishing in American Samoa: In 1994, commercial fishers in

American Samoa began using SCUBA, underwater lights, and high-powered boats for
coral reef fishing. Once SCUBA arrived, the catch increased by 15 times. Parrotfish were
particularly hard-hit, with 1/5 of the entire parrotfish population taken in a single year.
Local subsistence fishers saw a pronounced change. Before 1994, the subsistence
fishers had been able to catch enough fish to feed their families in just half an hour of
fishing. But by 2000, the local fishers could no longer catch the large or preferred fish.
The commercial fishers, in turn, argued that SCUBA was necessary for them to catch the
large fish that are used at weddings and other special occasions. The local fishers
argued that if SCUBA were banned, large fish would become common again and the
commercial fishers could then make a living by free diving.
The government of American Samoa banned SCUBA for fishing in March 2001. The
commercial fishers took their SCUBA-fishing technology to the separate nation of
Samoa, where the story is replaying itself: traditional fishers are resisting the SCUBA-
fishing and the local government is considering a ban.
Case Study - SCUBA fishing in Guam: Most coral reefs were natural refuges in the
past, before modern technology made them more easily accessible to humans. Until the
late 1970s, Guam boasted spectacular schools of large bumphead parrotfish, with
12
MODULE 4
individuals up to 153 cm (5 ft) and 75 kg (165 lb). The parrotfish slept in schools at night
on the open sand, but were inaccessible to free diving. When SCUBA, underwater lights,
bangsticks (underwater firearms also called powerheads or shark sticks), and high-
powered boats reached Guam, a relatively small number of fishers were able to
completely eliminate the huge schools of parrotfish. Guam's large Napoleon wrasse was
similarly eliminated. The last schools of large bumpheads were seen in the 1970s
(WWF/IUCN 1998).
4.2 FISHERIES IN CRISIS
The ocean provides us with an unparalleled source of food. Commercial fleets currently
land an average of an astounding 85 million tons of seafood per year. This is by far the
largest catch of any wild food source in the world. It is enough to provide 16.6 kg of fish
per year to every man, woman and child on the planet. Over the globe as a whole,
seafood provides close to 20% of the world's total animal protein intake. Seafood is
especially important in certain regions, such as Southeast Asia and the South Pacific,
where it contributes up to 90% of protein intake for local people. At least 950 million
people rely on the sea as their major source of food. Many of these coastal-living people
are very poor and have no other source of food.
The total world fishing fleet in 2004 consisted of about 4 million boats and ships, of
which 1.3 million were decked vessels, and 2.7 million undecked. Two-thirds of the
undecked ships are small open boats with no motors, propelled by oars or sails. This is a
vivid reminder of the preponderance of small-scale, local fishers in the global fishing
fleet.
Handout 4.1: Glossary of Terms
TRENDS IN GLOBAL FISH CATCH

Fishing is now dominated by commercial fishing fleets from just six countries: China,
Peru, the United States (US), Chile, Indonesia, and Japan. China is overwhelmingly
dominant, and Peru is a close second due to its enormous anchoveta fishery. These six
fishing fleets have the capacity for sustained open-ocean fishing in offshore and deep
waters. Nearly half of the global catch is exported to other nations. The international
trade in fish now exceeds that of coffee, tea, cocoa and sugar combined (WWF/IUCN
1998).
13
MODULE 4
(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO] 2006)
14
MODULE 4
(FAO 2006)
Who eats the fish that are sold internationally? The exported fish are primarily sold to
industrialized nations, who consume approximately 85% of internationally traded fish.
Less than a on forth of the world's population consumes over one-third of the total global
catch. Much of these fish are supplied to developed nations by developing countries. For
example, developing countries supply more than 70% of the world's canned tuna, as well
as 77% of the world's frozen shrimp and prawns (WWF/IUCN 1998).
Despite the global fishing fleet's ability to conduct offshore fishing, the majority of fish are
still caught near shore, with 80-90% of the world's fish catch caught within 320 km (~200
mi) of shore. For example, more than half of the entire catch of the Pacific Ocean is
caught along the coasts of Chile and Peru, areas that are rich in marine resources due
to upwelling of deeper, nutrient-laden water. In the tropics, most fishing is within 25 km
(15.5 mi) of shore (WWF/IUCN 1998). Overall, approximately 50% of the total global
fish catch is caught by small- and medium-scale fishers in nearshore and coastal areas
(WWF/IUCN 1998).
ARE THE WORLD’S OCEANS OVERFISHED?
The world's vast oceans were once thought to be a limitless and inexhaustible supply of
free fish and other marine products. Unfortunately, with the dramatic increase in human
population and fishing activities, it is now clear that the sea's resources are not limitless
and are not "free," they come at a cost to society and as a whole and to marine and
coastal ecosystems. Thoughtless use of the sea's resources has an increasingly
15
MODULE 4
expensive price tag. We are learning, unfortunately, that the marine environment can be
destroyed with impacts comparable to those on the terrestrial environment. The
difference between the two being that the ocean is a fluid environment, so that impacts
cannot be contained in the ocean like they can be on land.
The pressure that humans exert on the marine ecosystem comes in two basic forms:
actual destruction of habitat through coastal construction, pollution, or physical disruption
such as trawling, and overfishing. These activities represent impacts on the physical and
biological components of an ecosystem, however, there are also impacts on ocean
chemistry from point and non-point source pollution, and from climate change in the form
of acidification, rising temperatures, changes in precipitation and rising sea levels.
Trends in the global fish catch
Year (FAO 2006)
The global total fisheries catch has grown steadily throughout the last century, but
stabilized in the last 10-15 years. The plateau in annual total catch may at first seem as
if the situation is stable, but it hides three important trends.
First, fishers keep switching their target prey. As one fishery is fished out, fishers switch
to other targets that were previously thought not to be worth fishing. These in turn, are
eventually overfished. These other fishes are typically smaller species that are lower
trophic level (lower down on the food chain).
Second, fishers have benefited from an explosion in fish-finding technology in the last
two decades. Some fisheries have maintained apparently stable catches right up to the
point of a sudden collapse. What causes the sudden collapse? The stable catch levels
hid the fact that boats were getting better and better at chasing the fewer and fewer
remaining fish, until, quite suddenly, the last large schools were gone. This was the
16
MODULE 4
major reason for the "sudden" collapse of North Atlantic cod. It was actually not sudden;
cod populations had probably been declining for years, but this fact was hidden by
improvements in fishing technology.
Third, reported catches can be quite inaccurate (this is especially suspected of China's
reported figures). Recent re-analyses of global catch using better data have found that
global catch has actually been falling since 1990 - a troubling sign.
Estimated Status of the World's Fisheries

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations estimated in 2004
that of all the world's marine fishing stocks, 50% are estimated to be fished at capacity,
meaning that any further increase in fishing effort will cause the fish population to crash.
Another 25% of the world's fisheries are believed to be overfished, have crashed to
commercial extinction, or are recovering from an overfished state. Many of these were
once among the most commercially important fisheries, particularly pelagic marine
species. Only 25% of the world's fish stocks have any additional capacity to support
additional fishing.
The FAO summarizes this situation as: "the maximum wild capture fishery potential of
the world's oceans has probably been reached" (FAO 2007). Or, in other words, one
single species (humans) has actually managed to harness the reproductive potential of
virtually all the fish in the sea. This is an impressive, but rather alarming, feat.
A more recent analysis was published in the journal Science in 2006 (Worm et al., 2006).
This analysis found that one-third of all fishing stocks worldwide have collapsed, with a
"collapse" defined as a decline in catch to less than 10% of the observed maximum
catch.
The Danger of Fishing at the Edge

The 50% of fisheries that are fished at capacity is a troubling figure. Experience
suggests that it is very risky to fish right at maximum sustainable yield, since any slight
fluctuation in fish reproduction or survival, or even a very mild increase in fishing effort
can send the population into a downward spiral. Experience has shown that most
fisheries that are fished at capacity will eventually slide into an overfished state.
Absence of Data Does Not Mean a Fish Stock Is Healthy

The US fisheries provide an interesting example of the absence of data. United States
fisheries span a continent, include vast stretches of the Pacific, Atlantic and the
Caribbean coastline, and include tropical, temperate, and arctic fisheries. Due to the
U.S.'s status as a developed nation and its high investment in fisheries research, it might
be thought that US fisheries would be managed relatively well. Yet, many US fisheries
are not in a stable state. Of the 304 managed stocks that have been fully assessed, a
third are overfished. A third of these overfished stocks, in turn, were once commercially
significant fisheries, such as red drum, red grouper and red snapper in the Gulf of
Mexico, white hake and summer flounder in the northeastern US
17
MODULE 4
However, those are only the stocks that have been fully assessed. In addition, the US
has 650 fish stocks whose status is unknown or undefined! If we don't have enough
data, we simply don't know if the fish stocks are in trouble or not. Furthermore, it is
important to consider funding constraints. Funding for stock assessments tends to favor
commercially valuable stocks and/or stocks of concern.
This example illustrates how pervasive overfishing can be even in relatively well-
managed areas, and how hard it can be to get enough good data to be able to estimate
what is really going on.
As we have seen, overfishing is the reduction of a fish population by fishers to an

undesirably low level, to the point at which the depleted population cannot maintain a
viable and productive fish population. Overfishing occurs when fishing effort continuously
lands a fish catch that is greater than the maximum sustainable yield.
TYPES OF OVERFISHING
Overfishing may be defined from two viewpoints, biological or economic:
Biological overfishing is a decrease in overall fish catch that is caused by too much
fishing effort. Biological overfishing can take several forms, which often occur
simultaneously:
 Growth overfishing occurs when fishers catch too many small fish - young
fish that have not yet had time to grow. The remaining fish may be numerous,
but they are very small (i.e., even smaller than the fish that are caught).
 Recruitment overfishing occurs when fishers catch too many adult fish from
the population, faster than the remaining fish can breed. The remaining fish
are mostly juveniles who are not breeders, and the population lacks the
larger, older females that produce the most eggs. Few new fry are being
produced.
 Environmental overfishing occurs when almost all fish stocks decline at the
same time. In a healthy environment, if one fish stock declines, another fish
stock usually increases. But if the entire environment is being overfished, all
fish stocks can decline at once, leaving no alternatives for fishers.
 Ecosystem overfishing occurs when the removal of one or a few overfished
species from the environment results in unforeseen changes in the entire
ecosystem. Predator or prey species may experience booms or crashes, with
further results on other species.
All these forms of biological overfishing usually lead to economic (or Malthusian)
overfishing: a decline in the income of fishers to the point at which fishing is no longer
worth the investment of time or money. Greater effort and more expensive gear are
needed to catch ever-smaller numbers of poorer-quality fish. Large commercial fishing
enterprises may discover that their annual investment in fishing gear exceeds the value
of their catch. Local fishers may see their catches shrink to such low levels that they
cannot support themselves, and may decide that they have no choice other than to use
18
MODULE 4
illegal or highly destructive gear. Often, fishers are aware that overfishing is a problem,
but they see no practical alternative other than to continue fishing, due to their urgent
need to catch enough food to feed their families every day. Ultimately, fishing becomes
so difficult that fishers can no longer make a good living, and they are often driven into
poverty and hunger.
A sure sign that economic overfishing is occurring is when the total economic value of all
the fishing gear and equipment exceeds the value of the maximum fish catch that the
fishery can sustain. For example, the world's fishing fleets now have a combined worth
of about US $319 billion, but the combined value of the marine fish catch is only US $70
billion annually. This means that the fishing fleet would have to fish for 5 years just to
break even, but much of the gear needs to be replaced or repaired by that time anyway,
so it can become a never-ending game of catch-up. Currently, subsidies of US $124
billion are given to commercial fleets of developed nations to catch just US $70 billion
worth of fish each year (Green et al. 2003).
EFFECTS ON TARGET POPULATIONS

Overfishing has several effects on target populations including a reduction in the
average size and number of fish, a change in the sex ratio within the population, a
reduction in reproductive capability of the population and increased vulnerability at
different life stages. Each of these, as well as other impacts on target populations are
discussed below.
Reduction In Numbers and In Average Size

The most profound and obvious effect of overfishing is a reduction in population size of
the overfished stock, and a decrease in the average size of individual fish. The reduction
in average size can be quite shocking:
19
MODULE 4
(Green et al. 2003)
Often this is one of the first signs of overfishing, as fishers or fish sellers notice that most
fish are smaller than they used to be, or that large, high-quality fish have become rare.
Change In Age/Sex Structure

Since most fishing targets large fish, and since large fish are older fish, overfished
populations begin to have a skewed age/sex structure, with many more young fish than
is normal. Often an abnormal proportion of the population is juveniles:
(Green et al. 2003)
Case study - Gag (Mycteroperca microlepis): Gags, a type of grouper found in

the Gulf of Mexico, usually school in harems of females patrolled by a single large male.
Female gags may start reproducing at age 3 or 4. Males don't reproduce until they are
about 8 years old. Gags can live for 30-35 years, giving them a long reproductive
lifespan of up to three decades. During a gag's reproductive years, it will usually double
its body length. Today, however, most gags are caught between 2 and 5 years old. At
this age, females have only reproduced once or twice, and males not at all. As a result
the gag population today has almost no breeding adults. It is very rare today to find a
gag older than 12 years old.
Any change in age and sex structure usually leads directly to changes in the
reproductive rate of the population, discussed in the next section.
Reduction In Reproductive Potential
A reduction in reproductive potential can occur in several ways:
20
MODULE 4
21
MODULE 4
Loss of the Largest Females That Make the Most Eggs

Overfishing can cause a profound reduction in the number of eggs produced for the next
generation. This is because, in fish, body size is exponentially linked to reproductive
fecundity (number of eggs produced per year). This means that a large individual female
produces many more eggs than a slightly smaller female.
A 33 cm (13 inch) female jack, for example, produces about 50,000 eggs in one year.
How many eggs can a 63.5 cm (25 inch) female produce? We might guess that the 63.5
cm female would produce about twice as many eggs as a 33 cm female, because the
63.5 cm female is about twice as long as the 33 cm female. But a typical 63.5 cm female
actually produces 86 times more eggs - 4.3 million eggs! This example is not at all
unusual. In most fish species, the large, old females are by far the most reproductively
important individuals in the entire population, and their removal has a massive effect on
the population's reproductive rate.
(Green et al. 2003)
In addition, larger females also produce superior eggs, meaning that each egg is larger
and contains more yolk, giving the fish embryo a better chance of survival. This
difference in egg quality is not reflected in most mathematical models of reproductive
output, which assume that all eggs are equal (Dayton et al. 2002). An overfished stock
typically has only a few small females left, which produce small numbers of poor-quality
eggs.
Removal of One Sex in Hermaphroditic Species

As we saw in the case of the gag grouper, overfishing can particularly be a problem
when the sexes are different sizes. This can occur in hermaphroditic fish that change sex
at a certain body size. In these species, fishing that concentrates on the largest fish will
22
MODULE 4
preferentially remove one sex but not the other. Hermaphroditism is not at all uncommon
in fish. The gag, it turns out, is a protogynous ("first-female") fish, meaning that gags
begin life as females, and then change sex from females to males as they become older
and larger (typically, if the large male guarding a harem of females dies, the largest
female will change sex to become a male and will take over the harem). Over
the last 20 years, the sex ratio in gag populations has changed from 5 females for every
1 male to 30 females for every 1 male (Dayton et al. 2002).
The situation is even more severe in protandrous ("first-male") fish, which can lose
almost all their breeding females to overfishing. Since only females produce eggs, this
has a profound impact on the species' reproductive potential. For example, the Hawaiian
moi is a protandrous fish, meaning that individuals begin life as males, and later change
sex to become females when they are older and larger. Since overfishing selectively
removes large fish, the moi population is losing almost all its females to fishing, leaving
only the small males and non reproductive juveniles. In Hawaii, moi are now seriously
overfished, and individuals are substantially smaller than they were 30 years ago. Most
individuals are now either male or juvenile; very few fish survive long enough to become
female and produce eggs (Birkeland and Friedlander 2001).
Vulnerability of Spawning Aggregations

Species that group together in large spawning aggregations make easy targets for
fishers. Unfortunately, overfishing on spawning aggregations can remove the entire
aggregation. Once removed, it may never return, even if fishing pressure is eased. It is
not clear why aggregations do not return - it may be due to the removal of older,
experienced fish who knew where the aggregation was, and could lead inexperienced
fish to that location. In some cases, it is due to the population falling below a certain
critical density, below which there are not enough of the necessary social cues to trigger
spawning behavior.
For example, the spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper (Epinephelus striatus)
and Goliath grouper (Epinephelus itajara) rapidly disappeared from the Gulf of Mexico,
Caribbean, and South Atlantic. The fisheries of these species have completely closed in
1990, but the aggregations have not returned. Similarly, aggregations of pelagic
armorhead (Pseudoentaceros wheeleri) on Hawaiian seamounts, and of white abalone
in northern California, have vanished and have not returned (Dayton et al. 2002).
Depensation: Lowering Of Per-Capita Reproduction Rate

The disappearance of spawning aggregations is one example of depensation, a
reduction in the per-capita reproductive rate. In some species, a breeding population
needs to be at a certain critical density. Below that population density, breeding may
slow dramatically or may not occur at all, even though many individuals may remain. In
the marine environment, this phenomenon may occur with sedentary species that need
to be in dense patches of individuals in order for fertilization to occur (e.g., abalone,
scallops, clams, and sea urchins); with species that form large social aggregations for
spawning; and with some less mobile fish species. In the sedentary species,
reproduction may cease entirely if the population drops below a certain critical density.
23
MODULE 4
Depensation is usually not a problem for more migratory species, such as pelagic fish;
these fish can and will travel to find mates (Dayton et al. 2002).
Evolution of Smaller Body Size

One of the most dangerous and long-term effects of overfishing is that it actually exerts
natural selection for fish to be smaller. Fish vary genetically in their growth rate, the size
at which they begin to reproduce, and the maximum size that they will attain. If
overfishing of large individuals continues for many years, fish that grow to large body
size are selectively removed from the population. Essentially, the genes for "large body
size" are being removed from the population, and only the fish that tend to grow slowly
and mature at small body size are left. The population inevitably evolves toward smaller
body size and a slower growth rate.
Whenever fishing pressure is intense, large fish are almost always at a disadvantage,
meaning that they are more likely to be caught in nets than are smaller fish. As long as
this is true, evolutionary theory predicts that the genes associated with large body size
will inevitably disappear from the population.
Can evolution be reversed? Once the genes for large body size have been removed
from a population, will they re-appear if fishing pressure is reduced? We don't know.
Evolution does not always reverse itself, even when given the opportunity. In some
cases, those particular genes may have been permanently lost, and we may have to
wait many generations for new mutations to appear that can again cause large body
size. In other cases, the genes may still exist, but at very low frequency in the
population. How can we encourage these genes to increase to high frequency again?
The best way to reverse this process is to deliberately give large fish a selective
advantage, such that they have a better chance of passing on their genes than do
smaller fish. The best way to do this is to convince fishers to throw back unusually large
individuals - i.e., deliberately keeping the largest fish alive as breeders. In addition to
easing the selective pressure for small body size, throwing back large fish can also
improve the population's overall reproductive rate, because, as we have seen, large
females tend to produce more eggs.
24
MODULE 4
UNPREDICTABILITY OF ECOSYSTEM CHANGES
So far we've discussed the effects on the target species as if they occurred in isolation.
But they don't. Plankton, invertebrates, marine plants, herbivorous fish, predatory fish,
and their habitats are all linked to each other in complex ecological relationships. If one
species is fished out, its prey, predators and competitors will all be affected. The
predators may turn to other prey species, causing population crashes in those other prey
items; or the predator fish themselves may starve and crash in population numbers. The
prey items of the overfished species may explode in numbers.
The exact outcome is unpredictable. The ecosystem effects can ricochet through several
other species, in a domino-like effect that can have pronounced effects on distantly
related species. Sometimes an unexpected species explodes in numbers - squid, sea
urchins, etc. - while other species that had been thought to be stable can suddenly
vanish. In some cases, overfishing has caused a drastic restructuring of entire
ecosystems in ways that have sometimes been irreversible.
It is worth repeating one more time that these changes are unpredictable and can
sometimes be irreversible. Ecosystem changes are nothing to trifle with.
Let's take a look at several of the ways ecosystem structure and function can be altered
using case studies from the history of fisheries.
25
MODULE 4
A Classic Case Study: Kelp Forests

In one of the first (accidental) demonstrations of this important concept, the removal of a
single species from most of the coast of the western US and Canada nearly eliminated
kelp-forest communities from the entire coastline. Kelp forests are a richly productive
marine ecosystem consisting of giant seaweeds that form tree-like "forests" populated by
a wide variety of fish, invertebrates, and marine mammals, including sea otters. They are
the original and "natural" ecosystem of most hard-bottom near-shore habitats in cold
temperate seas.
Along the western coast of the US, sea otters were hunted almost to extinction by the fur
trade in the 1800s. The surprising end result has been the near disappearance of kelp
forests.
What happened? Sea otters eat sea urchins, and sea urchins eat kelp - particularly
young kelp. When sea otters are removed, sea urchins virtually explode in number,
sometimes covering the seafloor like a carpet. With so many sea urchins on the bottom,
no young kelp strands can get started.
The sea otter story of the Pacific kelp forests is well known. Less well known is that
Atlantic kelp forests have also suffered a similar fate, again because of a population
explosion in sea urchins. But in the Atlantic, it is primarily fish that eat sea urchins -
especially, halibut, wolffish, and cod, all of which are thought to be overfished. More
recently, sea urchins themselves have been overfished, and their populations have
collapsed in some cases. However, the grand, productive kelp forests of the past have
still not returned. In their place are simple benthic communities, often consisting of
invasive species of little economic value. Even though the main problem -
overabundance of sea urchins - has been solved, the original ecosystem has not
returned (from Dayton et al. 2002).
Removal Of Top Predators

Overfishing has historically tended to hit top-predator fish the hardest. A healthy,
unfished marine environment has a high concentration of large, top-predator fish (a
marine ecosystem tends to support more predator individuals than a similar terrestrial
ecosystem). However, top predators tend to be the largest fish of all, and so they are
preferentially targeted by humans.
Historically, the most desirable fish were these top-predator fish, which used to occur in
high densities in the marine environment. However, fishing has removed most of these
top predators, such as tuna and billfish. This has forced fishers to switch to fishing the
smaller prey fish that feed further down on the food chain. This continues cyclically until
fishers have removed most of the top portions of the food web.
In the Philippines, for example, sharks have almost completely disappeared from inshore
waters, due to overfishing at the top of the food web.
26
MODULE 4
"Fishing Down The Food Chain"

The demise of the large populations of predator fish has fundamentally altered many
marine ecosystems. Scientists fear that if we continue to "fish down the food chain" we
will soon have little left to fish except for invertebrates, such as jellyfish, krill and
zooplankton. In other words, we will have become the only predators in the sea.
Removal of Prey Species

Removal of prey species, that is, small fish at a lower trophic level (the level on the food
web) than predators, can also disrupt ecosystem functioning. The first species to be
affected are often the predators, which may go into a population decline. Secondary
impacts can occur on other prey species, as the remaining predators are forced to turn
to less-preferred prey items; as well as on the tiny algae and plankton on which the small
fish usually feed.
Case Study: Menhaden

Menhaden is a relatively small, low-trophic-level fish that is heavily fished in US waters
of the western Atlantic. Catch levels fluctuate between very high and very low catches,
in ways that suggest that habitat loss and increased predation may be affecting this
species, in addition to heavy fishing. Menhaden was once an important food item for
many top-level predators, including mackerel, cod, tuna, and striped bass. Menhaden
population crashes seem to hit striped bass particularly hard; since body condition of
striped bass becomes poorer when there are few menhaden. The striped bass, in turn,
went into a population crash in the Chesapeake Bay in the 1980s.
Case Study: Steller Sea Lion

The Steller sea lions of the North Pacific are considered a threatened species. Their
numbers have declined steeply from 300,000 in 1960 to less than 66,000 individuals
today. Three-quarters of the world's population of this marine mammal live in Alaskan
waters where their preferred prey, pollock, is heavily overfished. They have thus been
forced to switch to alternative food sources that are not as nutritious. Juvenile Steller sea
lions appear to have particular difficulty finding enough prey fish to survive.
Eutrophication
Removal of large amounts of small, low-trophic-level fish species can
also cause eutrophication, a nearly complete removal of oxygen from
large areas of water. This is due to an explosion in algae on which
small fishes and invertebrates often feed. When the small fish are
removed, the algae start to overpopulate. As algae grow in number, they
can literally turn the water green. This causes deeper seaweeds and
corals to die due to lack of sunlight. In severe cases, the algae can
actually use up all the dissolved oxygen in the water, causing virtually
every living thing in that section of ocean to die. The algae die and are
eaten by bacteria, which consumes oxygen, causing depleted oxygen
levels.
27
MODULE 4
Eutrophication is also usually associated with pollution by fertilizers from run-off from
agricultural areas or from sewage. The excess nutrients spur excessive growth of algae.
High nutrient run-off occurring in the same location as removal of small fish or
invertebrates is a dangerous combination that can cause eutrophication.
Case Study: Eutrophication in the Chesapeake

The Chesapeake Bay, a vast estuary of the eastern US, has suffered periodic
eutrophication outbreaks and a gradual decline in its seagrass beds. This is
predominantly due to overexploitation of two filter-feeders that once kept the algae under
control: menhaden (a small fish) and oysters. The Chesapeake once held vast oyster
reefs that could filter all the water of the entire bay once every three days. The current
oyster population is heavily exploited by mechanized harvests, and the vast oyster reefs
of the past have largely disappeared. The remaining oysters are so few that it now takes
them six months to filter the water of the entire bay. This, in combination with increased
fertilizer run-off, makes the Chesapeake vulnerable to eutrophication outbreaks.
Oysters in the Chesapeake are also under pressure due to habitat loss (unsound oyster
harvesting techniques have ruined the hard substrate that oysters require) and
introduction of pathogens (Dayton et al. 2002).
The Complexity of Ecosystem Effects

From these case studies, we start to see the complex, synergistic ways in which all
these factors operate. For example, from the case studies in the Atlantic we have
learned how overfishing has affected kelp forests and the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem.
The top predators are overfished, and the urchins that they eat have exploded, and as a
result the kelp forests have shrunk. Some of those same top-predator fishes are under
additional pressure by the loss of one of their own prey items, menhaden. Menhaden, in
turn, is food for the striped bass in the Chesapeake, which is also overfished; and
therefore, striped bass populations have crashed. The Chesapeake also suffers from
loss of its oyster beds, which has reduced water quality and caused eutrophication; and
the eutrophication has decreased sunlight available for seagrass beds, which used to be
nursery grounds for many species - including menhaden and striped bass!
The take-home message is:
Ecosystems are complex. When species are overfished,

we cannot predict how the ecosystem will change.
28
MODULE 4
(Green et al. 2003)
Discussion — Overfishing in Your Region
Consider what you have learned about overfishing, what you already know of Bird’s
Head Seascapes fisheries, and discuss the following questions with your group.
What fish stocks are being overfished in your area?
Which type(s) of overfishing do you think is occurring?
What is being done to address overfishing in your area?
What are the impacts to the environment from overfishing?
What are the impacts to the economy from overfishing?
(45 minutes)
Video: Shifting Baselines (20 min)
29
MODULE 4
SHIFTING BASELINES
What Did Healthy Stocks Originally Look Like?

The "shifting baselines" term was created by fisheries biologist Daniel Pauly. Pauly had
heard that one of his friend's grandfathers remembered being "annoyed" by all the
bluefin tuna that used to get into his mackerel nets in the strait between the Baltic Sea
and the North Sea. Bluefin tuna never occur there today, and modern fisheries
researchers were unaware that bluefin tuna had been there in abundance in the past.
Pauly realized that most fisheries data don't extend far back enough in time to capture
the true picture of what healthy marine fisheries used to look like. Most younger fishers
today have never experienced the original abundance of truly healthy fisheries in their
natural state. Thus, what we now think of as "normal" may, in fact, be overfished.
Case Study - the Gulf grouper: The Gulf grouper is a large bottom-dwelling fish
from the Gulf of California. It has a small geographic range, breeds in spawning
aggregations, and may be hermaphroditic. It is relatively slow-growing, probably
maturing at about 6 or 7 years and potentially living for decades, and can reach 2 meters
or more in length.
Systematic data collection on catches from groupers in this area began in 1986, and
those data indicate that catches have increased since then. Many fishers now report
catching 1 or 2 grouper a day, when previously they had caught none. Sometimes
several groupers are sighted on a single reef - up to 3 groupers at once. This has been
assumed to mean that this fishery is healthy and is in a "normal" state. Based on this
data, increases in catch sizes were recommended.
However, when local fishers were interviewed about their fishing history (Saenz-Arroyo
et al. 2005), they reported that catch size and the size of individual groupers decreased
precipitously in the 1960s and 1970s. Fishers were asked to describe the largest day's
catch they ever recalled, and the year in which that catch occurred. Many older fishers
recalled that it was once common to catch up to twenty-five groupers in a few hours,
having to stop only when their boats were full. The oldest fishers interviewed reported
that it was once common to see massive schools of up to 500 groupers, sometimes
swimming in circling patterns that are unknown today (possibly spawning aggregations,
though it is impossible to be sure). Several old-timers recalled an incident in which a
single ship using dynamite at a seamount collected a one-day catch estimated at 1000
groupers, filling the ship. This single one-day catch is larger than the total annual catch
for the last several years combined.
But after 1970, maximum catch size was never more than 8 groupers per day. Today
many fishers report that the "best catch" that they can remember is now one Gulf
grouper, and nearly half of young fishers have never caught a Gulf grouper at all.
Grouper schools are virtually unknown, and spawning aggregations appear to have
vanished completely.
Scattered old reports from naturalists and government workers back up the fishers'
stories. A naturalists' description from 1932 describes Gulf groupers "in unimaginable
30
MODULE 4
numbers." An old archived report from 1960 indicated that the Gulf grouper once made
up 45% of all finfish catches of the state of California. But today, the Gulf grouper
accounts for less than 1% of finfish catches.
A 74-year-old fisher interviewed in the Gulf grouper study said,

"In 1958-1959 we used to catch six or seven big animals in
just one hour. In those times there were more fish than you
could imagine today."
Exercise 4.2: Shifting baselines – where do we set the clock?
Objective: to understand the value of traditional knowledge in establishing the “way

things were”, so that we have a “baseline” against which to measure change over time.
1. Discuss with your team what other historical information you have about the “way
things were” in your MPA. Go back in time as far as you have information. Use your
flip chart to record this information.
2. Identify source of this information.
3. Evaluate validity of information.
4. Share information with entire group
(45 minutes)
Can Old Fishers' Stories Be Believed?

These old fishers' stories and naturalists' reports have traditionally been overlooked by
modern fisheries scientists, because they are anecdotal. That is, the fishers and
naturalists did not gather their data systematically, but were simply recalling their
experiences from memory. And human memories are fallible. Can we trust these old
stories?
In cases where fishers' stories can be cross-checked against systematically collected

fisheries data, the fishers' stories hold up quite well. Fishers work hard, and so they tend
to have a keen perception of whether their hard work is paying off. They often have quite
accurate memories of catch per unit effort, typical catch size, and maximum catch size.
Fishers also often have a large base of detailed information on a species' behavior,
breeding, seasonality and the locations where it once was found.
Anecdotal evidence can be extremely valuable in cases where systematically collected

data does not extend very far back in time. In this case, the anecdotal historical evidence
31
MODULE 4
clearly showed that Gulf grouper has suffered a devastating population crash that was
invisible to modern fisheries science until the older fishers were interviewed.
Fish Catch and Fishing Effort: Do More Boats Catch More Fish?
Let's now turn to basic fisheries science: fish biology and ecology, what methods people
use to fish, and why they choose those methods. First, let’s review how fish stocks
respond to being fished. The basics are simple: mortality (death) from fishing, or from
other causes, reduces the size of a fish stock, but this can be balanced by reproduction
and recruitment (settlement of young fish in a certain area; or, growth of young fish to a
catchable size).
A fish stock can tolerate a certain level of mortality, if the mortality is balanced by
reproduction and recruitment. At high levels of mortality, however, the stock cannot
reproduce fast enough to replace the fish being killed, and the stock size will decline.
The amount of fish caught (fishery production or catch) changes with fishing effort like this:
(PH-6, 2001)
Fish catch is shown on the vertical axis (y-axis), measured in kg or tons. Fishing effort,
on the horizontal axis (x-axis), can be measured in many ways, such as number of
boats, weight (tonnage) of boats, number of fisher people, time spent fishing, or distance
traveled; or a combination of these measurements.
At a certain intermediate population size, a maximum amount of fish can be removed

without any adverse effects on the fish population. This is called the Maximum
Sustainable Yield, or MSY. At low levels of fishing effort, an increase in fishing effort
results in greater catch - i.e., if more boats go out to sea, more fish are caught. This will
continue up to a certain point, to the MSY. Beyond this point, adding more boats or fisher
people will cause a decrease in total catch. This is because fish are being removed from
32
MODULE 4
the population faster than they can reproduce. This state is called overfishing. At point B
on the curve, this process can accelerate so that a small increase in fishing effort causes
a large decrease in catch. Many fisheries around the world are currently in this state, at
point B or beyond.
In real life, the relationship between fish catch and fishing effort is not this predictable.
Fish population size fluctuates with other factors or stressors, such as diseases,
predators, and food availability. Also, if recruitment and growth, the two factors that
cause stock sizes to increase, are affected by environmental factors such as pollution or
habitat destruction, stock size will decrease, and a given level of fishing effort will then
have a greater impact. Sources of pollution include industrial runoff, agricultural and
domestic wastes from land, and disposal of wastes by ships at sea. Habitat destruction
on land, such as deforestation, can lead to increased siltation of the coastal zone.
Underwater habitats can also be directly damaged by destructive fishing practices.
Climate change is yet another stressor.
History shows that if a fishery is not regulated, overfishing almost inevitably occurs. The
fish stock and catches decline, despite increasing effort and more aggressive fishing
methods. This pattern occurs in fisheries everywhere around the world. Interestingly, it
does not occur as often on land. A rancher, for example, does not remove more animals
from his herd than will be replaced by breeding. Yet fisher people often do this. Why do
fisher people make this error?
Exercise 4.3: "Tragedy of the Commons" Game
Objective: To understand that the natural inclination of fishers (and others) is to

take as many fish as they can for the short term, but actually if selective fishing is
to take place there will be more fish for the long term.
With your team fish your ecosystem according to the facilitator’s instructions. In the end,
see which team has the most fish.
SCENARIOS:
 Open (unlimited) access
 Sustainable fisheries
 Gear Restrictions
 Fishing season
(30 minutes)
Handout 4.2: The Tragedy of the Commons Game
33
MODULE 4
As the "Tragedy of the Commons" game illustrates, if all people have unlimited access to
a common resource, there is no incentive for any one person to conserve the resource.
If one fisher tries not to fish too much, he or she will not benefit from their restraint,
because others will simply catch those fish that were spared. This leads to a situation in
which every fisher catches as much as possible, all the time. If there is a large
population of fisher people, this inevitably leads to overfishing.
Overfishing is not good for anybody - it’s bad for the fish, bad for the environment, and
bad for fisher people. When a fish stock is overfished, fisher people have to work harder,
with more dangerous and destructive gear, just to catch low numbers of small fish.
Ultimately the fishes are nearly extinct, and fisher people can be driven into extreme
poverty and hunger.
To avoid this tragedy, the fishing effort must be controlled.
Controlling fishing effort is the immediate goal of most fisheries management. When
there is a large population of fisher people, fishing effort must be limited somehow (by
government, by the local community, or both working together) to avoid overfishing.
Numerous creative examples of controlling fishing effort have been tried throughout the
Pacific. We will discuss several of these later in this module.
Ideally, we want to keep the fish population at a size at which the maximum number of
fish can be removed per year without sending the population into a decline. When a fish
population is at a healthy size, quite a large amount of fish can be removed per year
without affecting the population size. However, fishing at the MSY does not allow any
room for error, because if natural events, predation pressure, food stocks, etc. can cause
the fish population to fluctuate to a smaller size, and if the fishing industry continues to
fish at the MSY, the fish population can go into a decline. Thus, it is usually safest to fish
just below the MSY, to leave a margin of error that can let the fish population recover
from unpredictable natural events. Fishing below the MSY is actually more profitable for
the entire fishing fleet.
In general, most fish stocks will need about one-third to two-thirds of the fish left over
each year to spawn, reproduce and produce enough juveniles for the next year. In
addition, the entire ecosystem needs to be functioning healthily, with sufficient food
stores for the fish to eat, a normal amount of predation pressure from top-level
predators, and, hopefully, no major diseases or other factors.
FISHING METHODS AND GEAR TYPES IN THE BIRD’S HEAD

SEASCAPE
We have reviewed how fish stocks respond to a general “fishing effort”. However, fishing
effort varies with the type of fishing method and fishing gear. Fishers are creative people
and are constantly inventing new methods and gear, but in general, there are major
categories which include: hook-and-line fishing, which is (usually) relatively mild in its
effects; traps, which are (usually) relatively mild; spear fishing, which targets individual
34
MODULE 4
fish of certain species; many varieties of nets, which can have different effects
depending on their mesh size, and on how they are moved through the water or over the
bottom; collection on foot in intertidal areas; and methods that kill or stun all fishes within
a certain area, such as cyanide and blast fishing, which tend to be very destructive.
Destructive Fishing Methods
All fishing methods will have some effect on the targeted fish stocks, but some also have
powerful effects on other species and the surrounding environment. Of particular
concern are methods that:1) destroy habitat, such as destruction of coral reefs or
seafloor vegetation, 2) catch non-targeted species (bycatch), 3) catch young fish (i.e.,
small fish) that have not yet had a chance to breed.
This table shows some fishing methods that are particularly destructive (modified from
PH-6, 2001):
Blast fishing Causes immediate reef destruction. Destroys the backbones of fish.
Kills all living things in the vicinity, including young fish, many other fish
species, invertebrates and coral. Reduces tourism. Requires many
decades for recovery.
Cyanide fishing Used to stun coral reef fish for live-fish collection, for the food fish or
(stunning of individual the aquarium fish trade. Unfortunately, also kills coral polyps (the
fish for live-fish organisms that build coral reefs) and invertebrates. Unsafe for divers.
collection) Reduces tourism.
Electrofishing Indiscriminately kills young fish and non-targeted species.
Fine-mesh nets Indiscriminately captures small fish; therefore, captures many young
fish and many non-targeted species.
Bottom Trawl Scrapes seabed and destroys sea-floor habitat; indiscriminate catching
of non-targeted species
Purse seine Indiscriminate catching of non-targeted species
Drive-in methods Pounding destroys corals and reef. Catches many non-targeted
(herding fish toward nets) species. Overfishes coral reefs. Unsafe for divers.
Spear fishing Catches rare remaining large fish on reefs and depletes certain
(with compressor or species. Creates a reef community consisting of small, undesirable
SCUBA) fish. Unsafe for divers.
Meting An emerging threat involving the indiscriminate removal of all edible
organisms from reefs. Fishermen use metal crowbars to rip away coral
cover to dislodge abalone, clams, and other invertebrates. This
practice leaves behind nearly 100 percent dead coral rubble (from
MacKinnon 1998)
35
MODULE 4
Handout 4.3: Illustration of Some Fishing Methods
Several of these destructive methods occur in the Pacific and within Bird’s Head
Seascape region. Use of explosives, night spear fishing, and fishing with modern and
traditional poisons, such as cyanide occur throughout the region.
(PH-6, 2001)
In addition to the methods mentioned, coral reefs are often targeted for collection of live
fish, usually collected by stunning them with cyanide. “Ornamental” fish are sold to
aquarium dealers. Some food fish are also collected alive. An estimated 20-24 million
fish, 11-12 million pieces of coral, and 9-10 million other invertebrates are collected and
traded each year.
Live-fish collection can be intense enough to overfish certain desirable or threatened

species. Collection methods can also damage other species and the environment (e.g.,
cyanide fishing), and are often hazardous for the human divers. However, if safe
collection methods are used, if the total fishing effort is regulated, and if threatened
species (e.g., giant clams) are protected, live-fish collection can provide an alternative
livelihood for local people.
Bycatch
So far we have discussed the sort of overfishing that is caused by deliberate catching of
the target species. But overfishing can also occur accidentally, through bycatch.
Bycatch is the unintended catch of undesired fish, due to the
36
MODULE 4
limited selectivity of fishing gear. Bycatch includes unintended

catch of target species that are too small or low quality, as well as
unintended catch of non-target species.
When fishing is intense, bycatch alone can cause overfishing of non-target species.
Bycatch can occur both during active fishing and in gear that is lost at sea or left
unattended. Marine species that share the same prey or feeding grounds as the targeted
populations are particularly at risk, including sea turtles, seabirds, marine mammals,
sharks, rays, etc.
Bycatch can reach astonishingly high levels. Globally, it is estimated that bycatch
account for nearly 27 billion kgs (60 billion pounds) per year throughout the 1980s and
early 1990s, or nearly 25% of the world's entire catch! Bycatch compounds the impacts of
fishing, extending fishing's effects into a much wider sector of ocean life than just the
target species. It is likely that no marine species or ecosystem remains unaffected.
Bycatch tends to cause the most severe population damage in species that have low
reproductive rates, and in those that have limited dispersal capabilities to re-colonize the
fished area. The first category (low reproductive rates) includes seabirds, marine
mammals, sea turtles, most sharks and rays, and certain long-lived finfish. The second
category (limited dispersal) can include colonial invertebrates scooped up in trawl nets,
such as sponges, bryozoans and corals, many of which will take decades, if ever, to re-
colonize the trawled area. For species that already have small populations or limited
geographic ranges, the loss of only a few colonies in a small area can have a
devastating impact.
Bycatch can have severe effects on other species as well. For example, shrimp trawls in
the Gulf of Mexico catch and discard 10-20 million juvenile red snapper each year,
representing more than 70% of each new year-class (Dayton et al. 2002). This is a
significant problem for the red snapper fishery, which is already overfished, and it pits
the two most commercially valuable fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico (shrimp and red
snapper) against each other (Dayton et al. 2002).
Bycatch of Seabirds
Seabirds feed on many of the same fish that fishing fleets target, and are also attracted
to fishing vessels for scavenging bait or offal. The greatest problem of seabird bycatch is
probably from longline fisheries, which unintentionally kill thousands of albatrosses,
petrels and shearwaters annually. For example, the Patagonian toothfish longliners killed
around 265,000 seabirds between 1996 and 1999, representing unsustainable losses to
the breeding populations of these birds.
In the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the total breeding population of black-footed

albatross is about 120,000 birds. Annual fishing-related mortalities are approximately
1600-2000 birds, a severe threat to this long-lived species.
Gillnets also take some types of seabirds, particularly the small diving birds such as
shearwaters and auks.
37
MODULE 4
38
MODULE 4
Bycatch of Marine Mammals

Bycatch from gill nets and drift nets is a major problem for many marine mammal
populations. For example, a typical swordfish drift-net will catch an average of one
marine mammal per overnight set. Small coastal porpoises, such as the vaquita or Gulf
of California harbor porpoise, are especially vulnerable to gill-net fisheries. Of the
population of 44 marine mammal species in the US waters that are considered at risk of
extinction, one-third suffers bycatch mortality that exceeds sustainable levels.
Bycatch of Sea Turtles

Bycatch from fisheries is the single largest factor preventing recovery of sea turtle
populations worldwide. While a number of factors can cause an initial decline in a sea
turtle population, such as destruction of nesting beaches or collection of turtle eggs,
bycatch is usually the final demise that prevents the sea turtles from recovering.
The greatest source of turtle bycatch in many regions is shrimp trawlers. Until the 1990s,
shrimp trawls killed more sea turtles than all other sources of mortality combined
(Dayton et al. 2002). Shrimp trawl bycatch of sea turtles has improved somewhat due to
the use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) in shrimp trawl nets. TEDs are required in all
US shrimp trawls and in some summer flounder trawls in US waters.
However, significant turtle mortality still occurs. This might be solvable with
improvements in TED design. Current TEDs are effective at saving the small Kemp's
ridley sea turtles, and this turtle species now appears to be recovering. However, the
much larger loggerehead turtles cannot escape through these small TEDs (Dayton et al.
2002).
Longline and gillnet fisheries also take some turtles, particularly leatherback sea turtles
in the pelagic longline fisheries of the Pacific Ocean (Dayton et al. 2002).
Bycatch Due to Ghost Fishing

Lost or discarded fishing gear can continue to capture fish for years, unattended and
unknown. This type of inadvertent killing is called "ghost fishing".
Drifting fish gear tends to accumulate in certain areas due to eddies and currents. Such
areas in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, for example, accumulated enough lost gear
to kill 25 endangered Hawaiian monk seals in a two-year period.
Lost gear that settles on the seafloor can also continue killing animals. On Georges
Bank, Canadian researchers retrieved 341 nets in just 252 tows, by dragging an anchor
along the seafloor - 1.4 nets per tow! Most of the nets had been on the bottom for more
than a year, and many were still actively catching fish and crabs. These nets were
holding between 3047 and 4813 kg (6717 and 10611 lbs) of groundfish, and between
1460 and 2593 kg (3219 and 5717 lb) of crabs. Most of these individuals were still alive,
indicating that they had just been caught very recently, and the nets, most likely, had
been doing a repeated series of such catches over time.
In a New England study, a survey of a single 0.4 km2 area of seafloor turned up nine gill-
nets that had continued to catch fish and crabs for over three years.
39
MODULE 4
Video: Don’t net what you don’t need! (10 min)
Exercise 4.4: Bycatch in or Around Your MPA

Objective: To understand the extent of bycatch within MPAs in the Bird’s Head
Seascape. This is another building block in planning for sustainable fisheries.
1. Working off a list of fisheries in your area, with your teams discuss what fishery or
gear type you believe generates the greatest amount of bycatch, what percentage of
your MPA is affected (the geographic extent of the fishery); and, what form it takes (i.e.,
protected species such as birds, turtles or marine mammals, ghost fishing, etc). (15
min)
2. Identify where there is not enough information to determine if bycatch is occurring, or
if there is no bycatch at all.
3. What do you view as the most important bycatch issues in your region? (15 min)
4. Report back to entire group. (20 min)
(optional exercise – 50 minutes)
WWF's online resource on bycatch:

http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/marine/problems
/bycatch/index.cfm
Shifting Gears
MPA managers can assist in reducing the impact of fishing gears on habitat and bycatch.
Morgan and Chuenpagdee (2003) provide five possible policy options:
40
MODULE 4
1. Substituting more damaging gear with less damaging gear types

Strategies to accomplish this include banning a gear outright, providing financial
assistance for fishers to buy new gear or modify existing ones, instituting catch quotas
for bycatch species, and so on.
2. Encourage fishers to change fishing practices

Gear configuration, when and where it is deployed, and how long it is left in place can all
affect bycatch and habitat impacts. In some cases, fishers can be encouraged to use
their existing gear in less damaging ways. Financial and other incentives can stimulate
this process.
One of the best examples of altering use of existing gears is the "back-down" method
now employed in the Eastern Tropical Pacific yellowfin tuna purse seine fishery. Boat
captains developed a technique to force a part of the net's upper edge underwater,
allowing dolphins to escape while tuna are kept. This new method of using an existing
gear type has helped reduce dolphin bycatch mortality.
Fishers can also use their own experience to distinguish among different species,
choose to fish in areas known to have target schools with few bycatch species, or avoid
trawling certain areas of ocean floor that are known to be vulnerable.
3. Promoting innovations in fishing gear and technology

Gear can often be modified in ways that promote selectivity and reduce habitat damage.
Changes in mesh size and shape, inclusion of escape or deterrence mechanisms for
certain species, or alterations in the way the gear is used can all help.
Examples include turtle excluder devices in shrimp trawl nets, bird-scaring lines around
longlines, and the "back-down" method described above. Raised footropes on bottom
trawl nets can exclude certain bycatch species, such in the small-mesh whiting trawl
fishery in the northeastern US . Use of less damaging circle hooks in longlines and hook-
and-line fisheries, instead of J hooks, cause less injury to sea turtles and also enable
release of the turtles. Large fish excluders can help non-target species from entering the
boat's hold.
Often, it is the fishers themselves who come up with the most useful gear innovations.
Fishers are creative people, and they know a great deal about the marine environment
and the behavior of the target and non-target species. In some cases, fishers already
have incentives to reduce bycatch, due to the bycatch species' taking of bait that could
have been used to catch more of the target species. In other cases, MPA and fisheries
managers, and various government institutions can spur the process with financial
incentives to improve gear configuration and use, reduce gear loss and ghost-fishing,
and promote gear recycling programs for old, inefficient gears.
4. Establishing area- or season-based gear restrictions
41
MODULE 4
The most effective approach is simply to close part or all of the fishing ground to certain
gear types. Within the context of MPAs, this is often done by having part of the MPA
legally fishable only with traditional gears that are relatively benign in their impacts.
Bottom trawls, in particular, should almost always be limited or banned completely in
MPAs.
On a broader scale, destructive gear can be limited or banned across wide regions Gear
bans can also be temporary, to allow overfished areas time to recover, or seasonal, to
limit ecological impacts during certain important times of year, such as during spawning
of a bycatch species. The effectiveness of such bans depends on fishers' willingness
and capability to comply with the bans.
5. Supporting future research

In many fisheries, we simply don't know what effect the gear is having, or what the
bycatch or discard rates are of a certain gear in a certain area. In these cases, research
is essential. An important component of research is also to focus on human behavior
and responses.
These policies will only work if fishers themselves agree that is worth doing. Gear use at
sea is hard to monitor. Observer programs are essential, as are financial incentives that
reward fishers for innovative and conservation-oriented use of gear.
Case Study: Research Reveals Key Patterns in the Spot Prawn Fishery
Spot prawns off the coast of California are caught with both trawls and traps. In 2002,
however, a research study discovered that these two gear types had very different
environmental effects, particularly on bycatch of overfished rockfish. The trawls captured
a ratio of 8.8 bycatch individuals (rockfish as well as other species) for every 1 spot
prawn, while in traps, the ratio was a much more acceptable 1:1. Trawls very often
caught rockfish (2.1 rockfish to every spot prawn, on average). Traps, in contrast, hardly
caught any rockfish (0.04 rockfish per spot prawn). Based on these data, the state of
California banned the use of trawls in the spot prawn fishery in 2003. This study shows
how research can reveal important differences in the effects of different gears.
Case Study: Gear Innovation for Longlines

Longline fisheries are notorious for their high bycatch rates of seabirds. Seabirds chase
the bait in mid-air as it leaves the boat, but they often swallow not only the bait but also
the hook, and are then pulled under water and drowned as the line sinks. Longline
mortality has been a particular problem for long-lived seabirds such as albatrosses, and
is the main source of mortality of the endangered black-footed albatross. Luckily, in this
case, bycatch is also against the economic interests of the fishers, since the birds are
stealing bait that could have caught more fish.
Early attempts to solve this problem included restricting fishers to using longlines only in
certain areas or only at night when many birds are not active. This was unpopular with
fishers, however, due to the limitation on their fishing time. Japanese fishers came up
with an innovative solution: the use of two long lines, covered with brightly colored
streamers that extend behind the boat on either side of the longline. Birds are scared
42
MODULE 4
away by the flapping streamers. These "bird-scaring lines", also called tori lines, have
become widespread. They have reduced seabird mortality by an impressive 92% in the
Alaskan sablefish longline fishery, and they can also increase catches for fishers.
Catches increased 32% in one study of Norwegian groundfish longlining. In addition,
bird-scaring lines are relatively inexpensive (US $260 per pair). To encourage adoption
of bird-scaring lines, the US Fish and Wildlife Service gave them away for free to
Alaskan fishers in 2000 and 2001, at a total cost of US $850,000 (Morgan and
Chuenpagdee 2003).
Case Study: Dolphin Bycatch in Tuna Purse Seines

Dolphins are frequently caught in tuna purse seines, including the yellowfin tuna fishery
of the Eastern Tropical Pacific. The bycatch of dolphins is due to the fact that dolphins
and tuna are both top predators who hunt the same prey (smaller schooling fish), and
the two species often are found in association together as they hunt, dolphins near the
surface and the tuna deeper down. Over time, tuna fishers have learned that if they
deliberately set bait and nets around large schools of dolphins, they can attract the large
tuna schools that are often underwater below the dolphins. The tuna come higher up to
get the bait, and then, when the purse seine is set to encircle the tuna, the dolphins at
the surface are also caught.
This issue first came to public awareness in the late 1980's in the US and Europe,
primarily due to media coverage by the conservation organization Greenpeace, which
publicized a 1988 video showing large schools of dolphins being killed in purse seines.
Consumer reaction was swift, due in no small part to dolphins' status as a "charismatic",
intelligent, social species.
In 1990 the first major tuna marketers, such as Starkist, began using a "dolphin-safe"
label on their tuna cans. This eco-label was at first a voluntary system with no legally
binding criteria. In 1992, the International Dolphin Conservation Act restricted tuna sales
in the US to tuna caught only with "dolphin-safe" methods, defined as fishing methods
that caught no dolphins. This amounted to a US embargo banning any importation of
tuna that had been caught using any methods that killed any dolphins at all. In the same
year, the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act in the US clarified the criteria of
the dolphin-safe label, limiting it to use on tuna products that had no dolphin bycatch at
all, specifically:
"No tuna were caught in the trip in which such tuna were harvested
using a purse seine net intentionally deployed on or to encircle
dolphins, and no dolphins were killed or seriously injured during the
sets in which the tuna were caught."
Embargos By One Nation Do Not Affect The Global Market
However, due to the strict US embargo and its unusually restrictive bycatch quota of
zero dolphins, many tuna boats simply left US jurisdiction and began operating under
43
MODULE 4
flags of other nations, particularly in Mexico, Venezuela, and several other Central
American nations. They could not sell their catch to the US , but a large national and
international market was still available to these fishers. Thus, the US embargo had only
a limited impact on reducing dolphin bycatch across the entire yellowfin tuna fishery.
International Pressure to Allow Free Trade

In 1997, the US embargo on non-dolphin-safe tuna was lifted, due to pressure from the
World Trade Organization (and its predecessor organizations) on the grounds that eco-
labels enforced unilaterally by a consumer nation amount to an unfair embargo that
restricts free trade by the producer nations.
AIDCP: A Binding Treaty by All Eastern Pacific Tuna-Fishing Nations

In 1999, a new treaty was drafted to include all major tuna-fishing nations of the Eastern
Tropical Pacific as participants in the dolphin-tuna issue. This was the Agreement on the
International Dolphin Conservation Program (AIDCP), which entered into force in 1999.
This is a legally binding agreement whose objectives are to reduce dolphin bycatch by
the following methods:
o Setting annual quotas for dolphin bycatch
o Seeking alternative means of capturing yellowfin tuna that are not in association
with dolphins
o Ensuring the long-term sustainability of tuna stocks and marine resources in the
Eastern Tropical Pacific.
Though the AIDCP agreement has come under fire from some conservation groups
(notably Greenpeace), on the grounds that any dolphin quota higher than zero is
unacceptable, the AIDCP is thought by most analysts to hold far greater promise for
reducing dolphin bycatch levels worldwide, compared to the previous US embargo.
Two Different Criteria In The US : Sustainable Bycatch, Or Zero Bycatch?

Conservation organizations and consumers in US continue to pressure tuna fisheries for
a stricter limit on dolphin bycatch. The original US embargo against any dolphin bycatch
at all has been lifted. Currently, any nations with large tuna fishing fleets must apply to
the US and demonstrate the sustainability of their tuna and bycatch policies before
being allowed to market tuna at all within the US . That is, to market tuna to the US ,
dolphin bycatch must no longer be zero, but it must at least be sustainable. This typically
means that the dolphin bycatch has been reduced by at least 99%.
Once cleared for the US market, the tuna may be sold to a variety of markets
(restaurants, prepared foods, etc.). But it may or may not qualify for the "dolphin safe"
label on cans marketed to individual consumers. Currently, the dolphin-safe label is still
governed by the 1992 Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act, and still signifies a
dolphin bycatch of zero. However, it is widely believed that this criterion for the dolphin-
safe label actually works against reducing total dolphin bycatch, because it prevents
those nations that have substantially reduced dolphin bycatch to sustainable levels from
receiving economic benefits for their efforts. The definition of this label is currently (as of
2007) the subject of legal battle in US federal courts.
44
MODULE 4
Discussion— Fishing Methods in MPAs
What fishing methods occur in your MPA? How destructive do you think each one is?
Which should be prohibited in your MPA? Which should be prohibited in other parts of
the Bird’s Head Seascape or Indonesia?
(30 minutes)
Exercise 4.5: Designing a Better Gear Type
Objective: to understand that with some innovative thinking a” high impact gear
type” can be made into a ” low impact gear type”.
1. With your team, take an existing gear type, identify the components of the gear that
are causing the impacts. (10 min)
2. Draw a picture of the gear type and modify it so that lessens the impact. (20 min)
3. Present modifications to whole group. (20 min)
(50 minutes)
4.4 FISHERIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR

THE BIRD’S HEAD SEASCAPE
We have reviewed some basic principles of fisheries science: the importance of fishing
effort, the vulnerability of fisheries to overfishing, the inter-relatedness of different
species, and some of the variety of fishing methods and gear types used in the Bird’s
Head Seascape and elsewhere in Indonesia. Armed with that knowledge, what exactly
can a MPA manager do when it is clear that overfishing is occurring, or that destructive
fishing methods and gears are being used? There are a wide variety of approaches and
potential solutions and many have been discussed so far in the training. This section will
highlight an ecosystem based fisheries management approach and review several
specific strategies and application in specific areas will be discussed.
45
MODULE 4
THREE BASIC GOALS OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
Fisheries management has three main goals: productivity (lots of fish), distributional
equity (all fisher people can make a decent living), and environmental integrity. To
accomplish these three goals, it is essential to first have a good basic understanding of
the relationships of fish stocks, fishing effort, and fishing methods, and the
interrelationships of different species and habitats.
ECOSYSTEM BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
Ecosystem-based management can be an important complement to existing fisheries

management approaches. Currently, it is understood that the traditional single-species
approach to fisheries management has proven to be insufficient. Ecosystem based
fisheries management aims to sustain healthy marine ecosystems and the fisheries they
support. This is a new direction for fishery management and essentially reverses the
order of management priorities so that management starts with the ecosystem rather
than a target species. When fishery managers understand the complex ecological and
socioeconomic environments in which fish and fisheries exist, they may be able to
anticipate the effects that fishery management will have on the ecosystem and the
effects that ecosystem change will have on fisheries (Pikitch, et al., 2004).
A comprehensive ecosystem-based fisheries management approach would require

mangers to consider all the interactions that a target fish stock has with predators,
competitors, and prey species; the effects of weather and climate on fisheries biology
and ecology; the complex interactions between fishes and their habitat; and the effects
of fishing on fish stocks and their habitat. However, the approach does not need to be
46
MODULE 4
endlessly complicated. An initial step may require only that managers consider how the
harvesting of one species might impact other species in the ecosystem. Fishery
management decisions made at this level of understanding can prevent significant and
potentially irreversible changes in marine ecosystems caused by fishing.
(Green et al. 2003)
47
MODULE 4
Exercise 4.6: Understanding fisheries management from an

ecosystem point of view
Objective: To understand the interactions between species, and between

species and habitats, to illustrate a functional ecosystem.
1. For each target species, work with your team to draw a food web of the major
predators and prey fishes in Indonesia, modeled after the figure above. (This will be an
oversimplification of the true complexity of ecosystem interactions. You may wish to do a
different food web for each MPA.) Do you know the preferred food items of the major
predators? Do you know the major small fishes? The major filter-feeders? How might
overfishing have altered this food web? Use the material provided and be creative. (30
min)
2. Do you know of any ecosystems in Indonesia that have collapsed or altered radically
because of fishing? Can you tell if there are any ecosystems that have not been altered
radically because of fishing? Discuss with the group and share your knowledge. (15 min)
Note: use flip chart paper and craft materials to illustrate the ecosystem components.
Total time: 45 minutes
Ecosystem-based fisheries management does not require that we understand all things
about all components of an ecosystem. Although an ecosystem perspective is desirable,
ecosystems are complex and unpredictable.
Implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management should be approached

based on what is already known about the marine ecosystems. The following is a list of
some characteristics:
 “Every marine ecosystem houses an assortment of species that have a wide

variety of habitat needs, life strategies, and value to humans.
 Interactions within ecosystems are intense and strong impacts on one part of the
species assemblage usually ripple through the ecosystem, causing concomitant
changes in other species.
 Every ecosystem experiences multiple conflicting uses, from recreation to
pollution to extraction of mineral and biological wealth.
 Multiple threats to oceans stem from natural and anthropogenic impacts on
habitats and populations.
 Some ocean threats, such as the effects of dredging, are local, but some, such
as nutrient runoff and overexploitation of pelagic fishes, occur far from the source
of the problem.
 Every call for biodiversity preservation and better management of fisheries stocks
includes protecting habitats for adults, juveniles, or spawners.
48
MODULE 4
 Climate variability- both natural and enhanced by global change- can impair
ecosystem function at some places and times so that protected habitats must be
duplicated for insurance against disaster.
 No single management tool- even preserving habitats- by itself can address all
threats to the oceans at the same time”
(Excerpted from Pew Ocean Commission 2003, pg. 32).
Marine reserves are one of the most powerful tools that can incorporate all the species
of a particular ecosystem. A strong coordinated effort is required in order to ameliorate
the threats to the world’s oceans. Responding to these threats requires
multidimensional thinking. Currently, fisheries management has few tools to protect
ecosystems without incorporating marine reserves. While other ecosystem-based
management tools are being discovered, in the meantime, it is useful to remember that
reserves or MPAs are a valuable available tool that allow for ecosystem enhancement.
IDENTIFYING PRIORITY FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ISSUES
A first step in developing goals and effective management strategies for a fishery or
ecosystem must first start with identifying the issues impacting a fishery and then
prioritizing the issues so that the level of management actions are aligned with the
importance of the issue.
This step is intended to identify the potential consequences, both positive and negative,
that the existing fishery or fisheries and the current or potential management tools may
have for the ecosystem and the stakeholders.
Adopting an ecosystem-based management approach has significantly increased the

number of issues relevant to each fishery because it not only covers impacts on target
species, but also impacts on bycatch species and habitats, plus potential indirect
impacts of these removals on the broader ecosystem. As such, this evaluation should
consider the ecological and human (economic and social) aspects of the fishery or
fisheries as well as issues related to implementing the current or future management
(ability to achieve). Consideration of the impacts of fisheries will need to be expanded to
include not only sustainable use of the target resources and its benefits for humans but
also impacts on and benefits from other living and non-living ecosystem components.
This would include, for example, the direct effects of fishing on bycatch species and on
the habitat, as well as the indirect effects of the fishery on ecosystem structure and
processes, for example by altering the balance of predator and prey or influencing
competition between different species. Any issues related to implementing the current or
future management should also be examined.
Analysis of broad issues should start from and be guided by the high-level policy goals
set at the national or regional level. The high level policy goals are likely to be found in
the national or local legislation, such as a national fisheries act and environmental acts.
49
MODULE 4
Fisheries managers in Indonesia and throughout the Coral Triangle have identified
several critical issues that threaten existing fisheries. These activities are described
below.
Unregulated Live Reef Fish Fishery

(Excerpted from SeaWed http://www.seaweb.org/programs/asiapacific/documents/LiveReef.pdf)
Trade in live reef fish represents an important commodity in Asia and the Pacific and
includes four distinct types of organisms within the trade stream:
• fish caught, shipped, and presented live to the consumer (the live reef food fish
trade)
• ornamental fish caught for the hobby industry
• corals sold to the hobby industry (although corals are not fish, they are often
included in the calculations of live reef trade)
• live rock, a hard substrate with colorful algae or coral growth
A recent global assessment of some 200 fisheries around the world concluded that the
live reef fisheries of the Western Pacific and Southeast Asia are among the most
threatened on the planet. This is due in large part to the growing and lucrative demand
for live fish and the use of cyanide to capture these fish. An estimated 50-60% of the
aquarium fish imported into the U.S. from the Philippines and 90% of the fish from
Indonesia are captured with cyanide.
The United States is the largest importer of coral reef species for food, jewelry and
aquariums. The US accounts for approximately 60% of the world demand for live reef
ornamental products, about 70%-90% of the live coral, and 95% of the live rock (rock
with coralline algae growing on it). The trade is estimated to be increasing between 10%
and 20% per year. The species exported from the Pacific for marine aquariums include
more than 150 types of reef fish, such as butterfly fish, anemone fish, angelfish, and
wrasse and over 60 species of live coral.
The live reef food fish trade primarily targets grouper species for the markets of Hong
Kong and southern China. Southeast Asia and Australia are the major suppliers of this
trade; yet, operators are increasingly seeking fish in more remote parts of the Western
Pacific including Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. According to a report by
TRAFFIC East Asia and WWF Hong Kong, the total annual value of live reef food fish
imported into Hong Kong is estimated to be over US $400 million.
Both live food fish and ornamental trade can have negative environmental impacts as a
result of poor collection practices. For example, it is common to use cyanide to stun the
fish. Although the cyanide may not kill the fish, it can kill the surrounding organisms and
coral reef. Species such as Giant grouper and Humphead wrasse are particularly
susceptible to overfishing because of their slow growth and long development to sexual
maturity. Due to overfishing, Humphead wrasse is now listed in Appendix II of the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and must now be
strictly regulated by importing and exporting countries.
50
MODULE 4
Because of the commercial value of this industry, there is strong motivation to identify
sustainable practices. The Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) works to provide the
hobbyist with a product that is certified as environmentally sound and sustainable. In
addition, the International Marinelife Alliance (IMA), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and
MAC are working with the Hong Kong Chamber of Seafood Merchants to develop
standards for the live reef food fish trade. The Hong Kong Seafood Merchants
represents 90 percent of the buyers of live reef food fish in Hong Kong and can have a
substantial impact on collection practices.
Handout 4.4 Unregulated Live Reef Fish Fisheries
Handout 4.5 Fish Capacity and IUU in Indonesia
Overcapacity of the Fisheries

(adapted from Word Fish Center http://www.rsis-ntsasia.org/resources/publications/policy-briefs/inaugural-
meeting/worldfish.pdf)
One of the most important factors threatening in Southeast Asia are too many boats
chasing too few fish. Most of the fisheries in this region are experiencing conflicts arising
from excess fishing capacity. While these productive fisheries resource systems provide
the much needed employment and protein requirements of the population, increasing
fishing pressure and over-harvesting of fishery resources have resulted in tense
competition over fewer and fewer resources. This, in turn, has led to high levels of
conflicts among different users over remaining stocks. The rapid population growth rate
often drives users to employ more effective, but destructive, fishing technologies.
Over-capacity is the situation where the capacity to capture is much more than the target
to be captured. Overcapacity in fisheries has been noted in Bangladesh, India and Sri
Lanka. In Indonesia’s Java Sea, excess effort is estimated at 428 units of 25-gross-
tonnage trawlers. In Vietnam, from 1987-1999, the three-fold increase in horsepower
resulted in only 1.81 times increase in the total catch. The serious state of the fishery
resources highlights the urgent need for the countries in the region to take action,
particularly in terms of managing excess fishing capacity. In 1995, East Asia contributed
about 78 per cent to global capacity with its approximate 980,000 decked fishery vessels
(PEMSEA 2003).
The Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries is responding to this critical
issue and has promoted several regional forums to facilitate the consideration of best
practices measures to reduce fishing over capacity, combat illegal fishing and to
continue to promote responsible fishing practices.
51
MODULE 4
Illegal, Unreported and Unmanaged Fisheries (IUUs)

(Excerpted from FAO, 2000 http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y3274e/y3274e0e.htm)
The application of fisheries management for the effective conservation and sustainable
development of living aquatic resources requires large quantities of information of many
kinds, from catch and fishing operations, and from biological, ecological, oceanographic,
economic and socio-cultural sources. Incomplete knowledge in managed fisheries
compromises fisheries management approaches. The absence of information in
unmanaged fisheries limits the ability to establish management at some future date.
IUU fishing limits the availability of information, and distorts and devalues information
from compliant (non-IUU) fishing.
There is growing evidence of widespread evasion of information obligations by fishery

participants. At national scales there is often complacency about the intractability of the
problem, as evidenced by the ‘standard’ methods in some countries to estimate
information slippage (statistical analysis, observer reports and best guesses). At the
international scale, particularly where there are bilateral or regional access agreements,
the degree of under-reporting against reporting obligations is difficult to assess, but can
be up to 75%. On the high seas, as fishing technology has increased accessibility to
deeper or more marginal stocks not subject to effective control, the degree of non-
reporting with respect to these stocks may well be 100%.
These descriptions of unregulated live reef fish fishery, fishing overcapacity (too many
boats and fisherman), and illegal, unreported and unmanaged fisheries (IUUs) are just
some of the top issues in the Coral Triangle fisheries. Can you think of more?
Exercise 4.7: What are the top priority fishing issues in Bird’s
Head Seascape?
Objective: To identify the key management issues impacting each fishery.
1. Each team selects a fishery and using a flip chart, list any of the ecological and
economic issues associated with that fishery.
2. Identify the top three issues for each fishery and discuss possible management
strategies for addressing each issue.
3. Report back to the larger group and compare issues across each fishery.
Total time: 45 minutes
52
MODULE 4
A REVIEW OF PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND

TOOLS
There are several management strategies and tools to be considered in fisheries

management. Several possibilities are presented below (from PH-6, 2001):
Closed Areas - restricting or zoning certain areas to entirely eliminate fishing, or to limit
fishing to certain small-scale, nondestructive methods and gear. Marine Protected Areas
usually are or include closed areas.
Closing areas is an approach that can protect a portion of a fish stock, a particular life
stage of the fish stock (such as juveniles or spawning adults), or vulnerable habitat such
as coral reefs or seagrass. Closing areas also reduces overall fishing effort throughout a
larger area.
Closed Seasons - restricting the take of specified fish species to a certain time of year.
This reduces overall fishing effort by reducing fishing time. It may also be used to protect
certain life stages of a species (e.g., during spawning season), or to allow an overfished
stock time to recover.
Licensing, Permitting and Taxes - Licenses, permits and taxes can be used to limit
the number of fisher people in a fishery by only granting a certain number of licenses or
permits. Income from license sales or taxes can also be used to finance the cost of
fisheries management or can be spread to the local community.
Allowable Catch Levels, Quotas and Size Limits - This method puts an upper
limit on the overall catch size. Typically, an estimate of the Maximum Sustainable Yield
catch is calculated (this requires some good research and information on the fish stock),
and the overall catch is then divided into quotas allotted to nations, fleets, fishing
companies, or individual fisher people.
Restricting Fishing Methods - Limiting a fishery to a certain type of fishing gear.

This may be done to reduce overall fishing effort by prohibiting use of methods and gear
that are too efficient, or it may also be used to protect certain species or habitats by
discontinuing use of destructive gear. Regulations of mesh size or trap opening size can
also be used to spare juveniles or certain species.
Handout 4.6: Fisheries Management Strategies for Specific

Problems
Handout 4.7: Applying Management Tools (for exercise)
53
MODULE 4
Exercise 4.8 - Applying Management Tools to Your MPA
Objective: to learn how to apply the most effective management approach to each
particular impact from fishing activities in your MPA.
1. With your team, pick one specific fisheries issue that members of your group are
currently facing in or near your MPA. The issue might relate to overfishing, fishing
methods or gears, user conflicts, MPA access, or any other conservation problem.
2. On the "Applying Management Tools" handout”, write down a brief description of the
problem, and then consider each of the five major categories above.
3. Answer the following questions: Have any of these methods been tried? If so, what
was the outcome? If not, should they be tried? Discuss with your team which method(s)
might be best for this problem.
4. Share your proposed management tool(s) with the whole group.
(40 minutes)
SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR DIFFERENT

HABITATS
Bird’s Head Seascape fisheries have some particularly valuable and vulnerable habitats,
including estuaries and lagoons, seagrass beds, coral reefs, and mangrove forests.
These habitats can each benefit from certain management strategies:
Estuaries and Lagoons
Estuaries and lagoons are shallow, semi-enclosed bodies of water with variable salinity,
often with soft-bottom mudflats. They are very productive and support many specialized
fisheries, including fishes that breed or nurse in lagoons and mangrove areas;
crustaceans and molluscs that live in soft bottoms; and species tolerant of varying
salinity, such as milkfish, tilapia, and shrimp. Some guidelines for management include:
 Minimize nearby land uses that cause removal of natural vegetation, landfill,
sedimentation, pollution, or that promote urbanization;
 Maintain the natural salinity by not changing the normal fresh and saltwater
inputs to the area (e.g., not damming rivers);
54
MODULE 4
 Regulate the type and extent of nearby aquaculture;

 Regulate fishing gear and fishing effort in the area;
 Require an environmental impact assessment for any nearby construction.
Mangrove Forests
Mangrove forests are extremely productive. They were formerly considered as

wasteland and were often cleared and converted to other, less productive, uses.
However, one hectare of healthy mangrove forest can supply many resources directly
(e.g., wood, fish, and crustaceans), and it is now known that mangroves support many
food webs that extend out into other habitats. One hectare (2.47 acres) of mangrove
forest supports about one ton (~907 kg) of fish per year. Important fisheries associated
with mangrove ecosystems include shrimp that depend on mangroves for nursery and
feeding areas; crab that feed on mangrove detritus; molluscs that filter-feed on
mangrove nutrients; and the many fish species that feed on these animals. These fishes
in turn provide food for larger fish species in nearby estuaries and in open water. Many
reef and coastal fish species use mangrove forests as nurseries. Finally, mangrove
forests that surround mariculture can filter many mariculture wastes. Management
guidelines include:
 All those listed for estuaries and lagoons,;

 Prevent removal or destruction of mangrove areas and minimize any cutting of
mangrove trees, or disturbance of mangrove vegetation;
 Replant mangrove forests, particularly near mariculture.
Coral Reefs
Coral reefs are extremely efficient at capturing nutrients and sunlight. They produce the
highest fish yields of any habitat in the world, per unit area. Coral reefs in the Coral
Triangle and Pacific Islands can produce up to 25 t/km2/year of usable fish. As an
example, Fiji reefs produce between 6 and 10 t/km2/year usable fish and Samoan
(American and Western) reefs produce between 7 and 17 t/km2/year. Reefs are also
extremely delicate and are particularly vulnerable to physical damage, such as from
fishing gear, recreational boats, and trawling. They often occur in association with other
habitats, particularly seagrass beds and mangrove forests that provide nursery and
feeding areas for many reef creatures. Coral reefs support an extraordinary number of
economically important species, including over 1,000 species of fishes; giant clams and
other bivalves; lobsters, crabs and shrimps; a variety of small organisms including sea
cucumbers, sea urchins, sponges, seaweeds and many snail shells; and large animals
such as mackerel, sea turtles, manta rays and dugongs that feed over the reefs.
Management guidelines include:
 All physically damaging activities should be absolutely minimized. This includes

several fishing activities (drive-in nets, trawls, traps, gleaning, etc.), boating and
anchoring, recreation and SCUBA diving, dredging, construction, etc.
55
MODULE 4
 Use of any fishing gear that selects young or immature fish should be minimized,
since coral reefs are important breeding grounds for many species.
 Coral reef tourism can be encouraged as an alternative means of income, but
should be regulated to ensure that reefs are not damaged.
ZONAL MANAGEMENT
MPAs are a form of zonal management. Zonal management involves dividing the
marine area into zones of different uses. Zones may be closed entirely to fishing, or may
allow certain kinds of use. Zonal management can be particularly effective for protecting
certain habitats such as coral reefs, or nursery or breeding areas of certain fish stocks
that use multiple areas during their life cycle.
ASSESSMENT
We have discussed many possible management strategies and how they might apply to
certain tropical marine habitats. Two important questions, however, are:
How do you know if an existing strategy is working?

How do you know when a new strategy is needed?
This is the role of assessment- assessing the local situation, the fishing effort, the health
of different habitats, the economic status of the fisher people, whether overfishing is
occurring, and so on.
Some habitats are obviously in need of protection - a major coral reef that is being
damaged by blast fishing, for example. In other cases, fisheries managers will need
some information about how much of a certain habitat is being destroyed and how much
still remains intact. For effective habitat management, it is also necessary to know the
biology and ecology of the major fish stocks, and especially where the spawning or
nursery grounds are for different species.
In the case of fishing methods and gear, fisheries managers need to be alert about what
new types of gear are being used. Fisher people are creative and are constantly
inventing new ways of catching fish, and fisheries managers need to keep informed
about new methods.
To assess overfishing, MPA managers need some kind of measure of fish catch, fish
size, or fishing effort. Sometimes governments can fund the necessary research. In
many countries there is not enough funding available to monitor most fisheries. Local
fisheries managers sometimes rely on informal interviews with local fisher people and
observation of the fishing fleet. An additional very valuable source of information is
starting a fish-measuring program. Even occasional measurements of fish size can be
very useful in tracking fishing effort and assessing overfishing. This is a good research
56
MODULE 4
project for fisher people to be engaged in if financial incentives can be provided. This is
also a good introduction for engaging fisher people in MPA management and beginning
a process for building trust.
Handout 4.8: Measuring Fish
Discussion - What are the Signs of an Overfished Area?
Discuss with your group all the ways you can think of to recognize when a fish stock is
being overfished.
 What information is necessary in order to know when overfishing is occurring? In

your local area, do you have access to this information?
 What management action might you take to respond to overfishing?
(First look at changes in fish populations over time, then look at fisher effort change over
time, then look at fishing gear and other practices, then look at other factors like water
quality, loss of habitat, look at alternative actions to managing fisheries, then look at
alternative livelihoods.)
(60 minutes)
Handout 4.9: Some Signs of Overfishing
4.5 RESPONSIBLE MARICULTURE
COMMON MARICULTURE PRACTICES IN BIRD’S HEAD

SEASCAPE
Aquaculture is the deliberate culture of marine plants or animals for commercial

purposes. It may use fresh, brackish, or marine water. Aquaculture that uses marine
water is referred to as mariculture. In Indonesia, the mariculture industry is growing (i.e.,
Indonesia is in the top ten aquaculture producers of fish food supply); however,
mariculture has only developed in the last ten years, and is dominated by the grouper
species, such as humpback grouper (Cromileptes altivelis) and brown-marbled grouper
(Epinephelus fuscoguttatus), as well as seaweeds (Eucheuma spp. and Gracilaria spp.).
57
MODULE 4
In 1978, brackish water pond areas increased significantly with the successful
development of the eyestalk ablation technique and the rapid growth of shrimp
hatcheries. In South Sumatra and Lampung Provinces brackish water pond areas were
expanded by the private sector to develop large-scale pond culture using the Nucleus
Estate System. Penaeid shrimps and milkfish (Chanos chanos) are the common
commodities (FAO 2006-2009).
Mariculture can provide important sources of income and improved nutrition for local
fisher people. However, mariculture can cause problems as well. Mariculture works best
when it is located in an appropriate site for the species, does not require significant
destruction of native habitat and native fisheries, and is responsibly managed so that it
does not harm the surrounding environment by the spread of wastes, pollution, or
diseases.
Handout 4.10: Impacts and Benefits of Mariculture Practices
PROBLEMS WITH MARICULTURE
Though mariculture can provide alternative sources of income, it also can cause
significant problems for the surrounding environment, as well as loss of some fisheries
income. Mariculture industries should be monitored whenever possible, and regulated or
otherwise encouraged to use environmentally friendly practices. Some common issues
(modified from PH-6, 2001) are:
Destruction and Conversion of Natural Habitats, With Loss of Native

Fisheries
For example, mangrove forests cleared for shrimp farms. This also can cause loss of
productive fishing grounds. Questions to ask include:
o How much natural habitat was cleared to create the mariculture industry?
o What fisheries or other sources of income (e.g., tourism) were affected?
o How could that habitat have helped support a healthy native fishery?
o How can the trade-off of mariculture vs. native fisheries be measured?
Pollution and Sedimentation From Uneaten Feed, Wastes, Antibiotics and

Other Chemicals
Pollution and sedimentation is a major problem with many forms of mariculture.

Questions to ask include:
o How crowded are the cages or pens?
o Are animals kept at a reasonable density?
o How much feed do the animals actually eat?
o How much is wasted?
58
MODULE 4
o Are there different feeding schedules or methods that would cause less
food waste?
o Are antibiotics, pesticides, etc., routinely used, or only when needed?
o Are cages frequently abandoned due to sedimentation?
59
MODULE 4
Introduction of Exotic Species and Diseases
Non-native species used for mariculture can potentially become invasive species,
outcompeting native species, and they introduce diseases to the native populations.
Questions to ask include:
o Is the species native or non-native? How might it affect the local

environment?
o Is the species genetically modified?
o Is there a program in place to control the introduction of exotic species?
o What disease outbreaks might occur, or which have already occurred?
Discussion—Mariculture in MPAs
 Does mariculture in the Bird’s Head Seascape have a substantial impact on any
critical habitats?
 What mariculture practices would you encourage to lessen impacts on water quality?
 If you were going to allow mariculture activities in your MPA, which species are the
least damaging to the environment?
(30 minutes)
Videos: Farming the Seas or A Fisher’s Journey (optional)
60

BHS MPA101 Mod4 Fisheries Revised6

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

BHS MPA101 Mod4 Fisheries Revised6

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

FISHERIES IN BIRD’S HEAD SEASCAPE

MPAs and FISHERIES IN

4.1 THE ORIGINS OF FISHING

Traditional Use of Fisheries

4.2 FISHERIES IN CRISIS

Trends in Global Catch

4.3 IMPACTS FROM FISHING

4.4 FISHERIES MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR THE BIRD’S HEAD SEASCAPE

Three Basic Goals of Fisheries Management

Specific Management Considerations for Different Habitats

4.5 RESPONSIBLE MARICULTURE

Common Mariculture Practices

The majority of the following material is excerpted or modified from:

Cinner, J., M. J. Marnane, T. R. McClanahan, and G. R. Almany 2005. Periodic closures as

Dalzell, P. 1998. The Role of Archaeological and Cultural-Historical Records in Long-Range

MacKinnon, N. Destructive Fishing Practices in the Asia-Pacific Region, ICRI Panel 1:

Pikitch, E.K., C. Santora, E.A. Babacock, A. Bakun, R. Bonfil,D.O. Conover, P. Dayton, P.

Sea Around Us Project. 2008. Access on 2/11/08.

IMPORTANCE OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT SKILLS

LINKS TO OTHER CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAMS

INDICATORS OF EFFECTIVE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT KNOWLEDGE

Assessing what you have learned about Fisheries Issues

Long-term indicators of a good understanding of Fisheries Issues

4.1 THE ORIGINS OF FISHING

TRADITIONAL USE OF FISHERIES

TRADITIONAL FISHERIES CONTROLS

Overfishing is not inevitable if controls are effective.

Case Studies of Traditional Controls

Traditional Controls in Hawai'i

As described in Birkeland and Friedlander (2001), the Hawaiians' traditional restrictions

Hawaiian island culture, in general, emphasized heritage, tenure, and responsible

Traditional Fishing Controls in Buen Hombre, Dominican Republic

Examples of sustainable practices adopted by the Buen Hombre fishers

speak with government officials."

Traditional Controls Among Louisiana Oyster Fishers, US

In contrast, the neighboring state of Mississippi lacks this long-standing tradition of

Traditional Controls on the Island of Kakarotan, North Sulawesi, Indonesia

Kakarotan Island, in the northernmost reaches of the Sangihe-Talaud archipelago, is a

Why Do Some Cultures Develop Such Effective Fishing Controls?

Do traditional fishing communities always develop such effective controls? Not

Natural Resource Communities

A local community that is heavily dependent on a certain natural resource tends to

Exercise 4.1: Traditional controls in the Bird’s Head Seascape

2. Take 30 minutes to discuss experiences with entire class. (40 minutes)

Changes in Fishing Effort and Control

Increase in Fishing Effort World-wide

Advances In Fishing Technology

Demise of Natural Refuges By Technology

Case Study - SCUBA fishing in American Samoa: In 1994, commercial fishers in

4.2 FISHERIES IN CRISIS

Handout 4.1: Glossary of Terms

TRENDS IN GLOBAL FISH CATCH

(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO] 2006)

ARE THE WORLD’S OCEANS OVERFISHED?

Year (FAO 2006)

Estimated Status of the World's Fisheries

The Danger of Fishing at the Edge

Absence of Data Does Not Mean a Fish Stock Is Healthy

As we have seen, overfishing is the reduction of a fish population by fishers to an

Overfishing may be defined from two viewpoints, biological or economic:

EFFECTS ON TARGET POPULATIONS

Reduction In Numbers and In Average Size

(Green et al. 2003)

Change In Age/Sex Structure