Updated March 24 at 10:24am

Time to rethink fishery management?

By John P. Lee
PBN Staff Writer

Fishery management traditionally has focused on fishing pressure, the removal of animals from a population with nets, lines and traps, as the only statistic worth using in the regulatory equation.

To continue reading this article, please do one of the following.


Time to rethink fishery management?


Fishery management traditionally has focused on fishing pressure, the removal of animals from a population with nets, lines and traps, as the only statistic worth using in the regulatory equation.

The rationale is simple, at least in theory: If the landings in a fishery drop, it’s assumed that the population has declined.

Everything else that might change a fish stock – all the environmental, ecological or climatic variables that are virtually impossible to quantify with any accuracy – have been addressed as statistical constants in fish-population models.

But climate change and its rapid effect on fisheries are forcing scientists and policymakers to rethink the traditional management approach. Suddenly, every fixed point in the equation has to be reconsidered as a network of moving parts.

“We’re feeling pressure from a lot of people to get out in front of climate change,” said Richard Seagraves, senior staff scientist at the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, the federal regulatory body responsible for many of Rhode Island’s most important fish stocks. “We’re all asking ourselves, how does climate change impact the way we think about fish stocks? Whatever the answer, it’s going to be a huge undertaking.”

That re-examination has opened the doors for a new way of looking at fishery management that goes beyond fishing effort. Officials now recognize that predator and prey relationships can alter a fish stock: Seals, dogfish and sea bass can eat an enormous amount of squid, cod, lobster; a change in surface or bottom temperature can alter a fish stock by making the fish shift to more favorable habitats; and bycatch on fishing vessels, the discarding that happens at sea, often without proper documentation, can alter a stock by not accounting for animals being removed.

Every decision made in fisheries management gets run through a statistical model. Fishery policy is hungry for data, and its appetite will only increase as scientists, fishermen and managers try to understand and model the complex, interwoven relationships of the fishing industry and the marine environment, not as separate things but together.

Climate change scientists have their own models, but many are designed to identify patterns or generate predictions on a huge scale. For fishery-management purposes, the scale is just too large, way beyond the local concerns about where fish are caught, eaten, where fish decide to swim away, or head for new ground, says John Manderson, a fishery ecologist with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Next Page


4 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment

John -

Great job. I have been writing about the shortcomings of our fishing-centric attempts to manage our fisheries for most of two decades. The New England groundfish debacle is only the most obvious example of how ultimately futile this can be, and how much human misery it has caused and is continuing to cause in fishing communities on all of our coasts.

Keep up the good work. It's tremendously refreshing to read an article that wasn't written directly from a press release paid for by one of a handful of mega-foudations that has no regard for fishermen or fishing communities.

Monday, April 7, 2014 | Report this

This piece brings up a great point about rethinking fishery management. Methods like ecosystem-based fishery management, where multiple ecosystem measurements are taken into account, need to be used to address the needs of fish and fishermen alike. What happens in our rivers has a huge effect on our oceans, and vice versa.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014 | Report this

Great article. Taking new perspectives on fishery management is important, as long as we keep in mind the importance of maintaining habitat protection. This can really help provide resilience for marine species against climate change effects on ecosystems in RI. This effort, combined with minimizing bycatch of nontarget fish (as well as birds and mammals, of course) can help ecosystem plans take an appropriately broad view.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014 | Report this

This article does a good job of putting in context the larger changes happening in fisheries in RI and greater New England. What needs to follow is smarter management policies that maintain habitat protection. Some plans, like the currently proposed Omnibus Habitat Amendment, don't do enough, and in fact will significantly reduce protection of habitat in New England's ocean waters. We need to protect areas known to shelter spawning aggregations of fish, and to protect young fish and forage species.

This is a solvable problem, but we have to work together. We don't want to fall back into the well just as we're beginning to climb out!

Wednesday, April 16, 2014 | Report this
Latest News