- Email: [email protected]
Fisheries monitoring: Perspectives from the United States
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Aquaculture and Fisheries journal homepage: http://www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/ aquaculture-and-fisheries
Fisheries monitoring: Perspectives from the United States Robert Boenisha,∗, Daniel Willardb, Jacob P. Kritzera, Kathleen Reardonc a b c
Environmental Defense Fund, 18 Tremont St. Suite 850, Boston, MA, 02108, USA Environmental Defense Fund, 301 Congress Ave. Suite 1300, Austin, TX, 78701, USA Maine Department of Marine Resources, 194 McKown Point Rd, West Boothbay Harbor, ME, 04575, USA
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Fisheries Fisheries monitoring Fisheries management Sustainability
Fisheries monitoring in the United States exists in many forms and serves many functions due to geographically varying objectives, practices, technology, institutional structures, and funding. In the U.S and abroad, diverse catch methods commonly exist for the same stock, thus monitoring and reporting strategies need to be tailored to unique operational needs. Common management challenges include funding limitation, survey design, coverage, and implementation. We describe three innovative examples of fisheries monitoring in the United States. These stories of success and failure can inform the design and implementation of new monitoring pilots and aid crafting both regional and national policies. We explore the innovative vessel monitoring and electronic logbook practices across multiple sectors for Gulf of Mexico red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus). Then, we examine a unique monitoring program that produces critical, near real-time genetic and population surveys for sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Our final case study describes the many fishery-dependent and -independent data streams for American lobster (Homarus americanus) in New England. Across all monitoring cases exists an explicit focus on the most critical aspects of organism life history. We find strong cross-institutional working relationships and adept agency coordination are imperatives in instances of stocks occupying multiple state or federal boundaries. Our results suggest the most effective approaches address the unique data needs of a fishery, and for this, thorough understanding of both biological and socioeconomic aspects of the fishery is a prerequisite. Ultimately, the monitoring program should jointly incentivize compliance while promoting continued and evolving interaction between resources users, scientists, and management.
1. Introduction The footprint of wild capture fisheries is global, the harvest methods are diverse, and similarly, so are management and monitoring regimes. It is clear from decades of fisheries over-exploitation and substantial ecosystem and climate changes that responsible management and monitoring are needed to maintain productive ocean ecosystems (Gaines et al., 2018). If left unmanaged and in absence of a common pool resource management system (Ostrom, 2009) fisheries can be a failure of the commons (sensu Hardin, 1968). How can we best monitor a fishery? The first and most obvious step is to consider the population dynamics of the species in question. This includes measurable variables such as growth rate, reproduction, mortality, and spatio-temporal patterns. Given that aquatic organisms commonly go through complex life histories (Wilbur, 1980), the first step generates particular challenges and uncertainties. Thus, it is necessary to identify key stages of life history that produce valuable signals of stock trends. The design of a monitoring program should aim to
∗
capture dynamics of both biological and spatio-temporal trends due to the near certainty that fisheries and ontogeny operate in different spatial extents and scales (Petitgas, 2001). The next, and maybe not as obvious consideration is the monitoring of the harvest process itself. To understand how fishers prosecute the resources, at a minimum one must consider a certain seasonality component, the magnitude of fishing effort, and a measure of catch or catch efficiency. Beyond simple metrics, engagement with industry and continual efforts to understand ‘on the water’ dynamics can be invaluable and pay dividends for compliance with regulation and participation in monitoring (Runnebaum, Maxwell, Stoll, Pianka, & Oppenheim, 2018). Biased fishery information can generate large uncertainties and poor management advice (Myers, Hutchings, & Barrowman, 1997). Therefore, data quality issues are of primary concern for all parties (science, management, and industry). Unfortunately, these data are often hard to obtain for technical, financial, and social reasons. Additional challenges arise due to the inherent nature of simultaneously navigating complex biological and social systems. As is becoming
Corresponding author. Environmental Defense Fund, 18 Tremont St. Suite 850, Boston, MA, 02108, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Boenish).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaf.2019.10.002 Received 28 March 2019; Received in revised form 19 July 2019; Accepted 9 October 2019 2468-550X/ © 2019 Shanghai Ocean University. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
Please cite this article as: Robert Boenish, et al., Aquaculture and Fisheries, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaf.2019.10.002
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
under a series of rebuilding plans imposing limits on directed fishing mortality and shrimp trawl bycatch mortality (Linton, 2012). As the stock has been rebuilding and quotas have been increasing in recent years, the average size of fish caught by recreational fishers has increased, causing their allocated quota to be reached faster. Several Gulf of Mexico states have opened state waters to recreational red snapper fishing for extended periods while federal waters are closed, leaving less quota available for federal seasons. Accordingly, recreational overharvests have been common and fishing seasons for red snapper have shortened considerably in recent years (NOAA Southeast Regional Office, 2019). In 2017, the private recreational fishing season was shortened to just three days (from around 200 as recently as 2008), causing political strife, and eventually a federal intervention to extend the fishing season, followed by litigation to overturn it (Ocean Conservancy et al. & Ross, 2017). Conversely, with the IFQ system, commercial fishers are given flexibility to target snapper year-round when it makes economic sense in exchange for enhanced reporting and monitoring requirements.
abundantly clear globally, wide spatial or seasonal distributions will increasingly require multilateral monitoring efforts, spanning provincial to multinational agreements (Pinsky, Worm, Fogarty, Sarmiento, & Levin, 2013). Because of the many state boundaries, productive and valuable fisheries, and long history of leadership in fisheries science and monitoring, we will focus our efforts on the United States. The United States currently manages nearly 500 marine fisheries (NOAA, 2018) spanning all of its coastal and shelf waters, and therefore provides diverse and illustrative case studies in different approaches to monitoring. Via the Magnuson Stevens Act (U.S., 2009) and its subsequent reauthorizations, a system of eight regional management councils and six science centers provide the foundation for U.S. federal fisheries management. Importantly, this system is designed to work in coordination with state agencies and relevant international partnerships to provide data and perspectives for the entire spatial extent of a stock. Beyond jurisdictional challenges, considerable technical challenges are often some of the largest hurdles to achieving a robust monitoring program. Because of the large geographical range and complexities of many organisms’ life histories, and the social and tactical norms of fishers, fisheries monitoring can take many forms and functions. Additionally, institutional structure, incentives, and funding can play important roles. Differing and competing technologies are being implemented for monitoring, including random catch sampling, mandatory reporting, on-vessel observers, artificial intelligence (Stokesbury et al., 2017), and satellite boat tracking (Dunn et al., 2018). With all of these challenges, robust design of management with consideration of life history and available technology is an important first step, to be followed by established and continued interaction between resource users and management to create a broad range of compliance incentives. In this paper we highlight three diverse case studies from the United States to critically examine innovation, successes, and limitations to monitoring strategy effectiveness. We synthesize and draw themes across a spectrum of gears, biology, geography, and exploitation history to extract general lessons for monitoring program development.
2.2. Monitoring program In total, red snapper is monitored by a combination of five fisheryindependent and three fishery-dependent surveys, landings reports, and dockside validation (Table 1). The various surveys and reports are conducted by different federal, state, and university partners, delivering timely biological and economic data to managers through digital and physical reporting measures. Fishing for commercial red snapper and other species in the Gulf of Mexico IFQ program involves several enhanced monitoring requirements. First, each fisher is required to hail out/and hail in for each trip, to not only better signal fishing effort but also to increase accountability (being caught fishing without hailing out is an easily observed infraction). While at sea, vessels are tracked with vessel monitoring systems. Second, after a trip, red snapper and other IFQ species must be reported through an online IFQ system using a landing transaction site. After landings are submitted by the dealer, they must be verified by the fisher. Transactions must be entered within 96 h of the hail-in notification or on the day of offload, whichever occurs sooner. The online system can then be used for real-time quota tracking, trading, and analysis by management and the users. For any Gulf of Mexico species in federal management (including those not in the IFQ program), dealers are required to submit weekly electronic trip tickets to the online system. This step is redundant for red snapper and other IFQ species but it provides managers with catch monitoring data for other managed species. Third, fishers must report red snapper and other federally managed species’ landings in paper-based coastal logbook vessel trip reports (VTRs). VTRs record additional catch and effort characteristics about the trip. Finally, state and federal dockside sampling efforts and the Reef Fish Observer Program provide catch validation and biological samples for stock assessment. Non-target catches of red snapper from other commercial fisheries, such as from shrimp trawling, are included from anterior observer programs (SEDAR, 2018). The recreational sectors on the other hand have long had less monitoring responsibility. Monitoring standards vary by recreational mode. In the recreational for-hire fishery, covering over 1300 federally permitted vessels, limited charter vessel catch and effort data are sampled by telephone through the federal Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) For-Hire Survey. In contrast, the full census of approximately 70 Gulf of Mexico headboats – generally large recreational for-hire vessels pricing trips by the “head” – were required to submit trip-level paper logbooks monthly to the NOAA Southeast Region Headboat Survey beginning in 1986 and currently are required to submit trip-level electronic logbooks weekly. The lowest monitoring standards have been required of the vast and diffuse private recreational fishery. Traditionally, private recreational monitoring has been operated by MRIP, via a combination of dockside sampling and a telephone survey. Recently, the mail-based Fishing Effort Survey
2. Vessel monitoring and electronic logbook practices in the Gulf of Mexico 2.1. Fishery overview Perhaps the most iconic fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) has been the target of commercial exploitation since the 1840's but suffered a severe population crash by the 1990's due to growing commercial and recreational catch and shrimp trawl bycatch (SEDAR, 2018). Red snapper's rich history and high culinary value have established its cultural and economic importance in the Southeastern United States. Management for this species spans five separate states and federal waters (Farmer, Malinowski, McGovern, & Rubec, 2016). Annual quotas are allocated to three sectors: the commercial fleet (51%), limited entry federally permitted for-hire charter fishing operators (20.73%), and regulated open access private anglers (28.27%). Notably, the commercial sector has operated under an individual fishing quota (IFQ) system since 2007, while the charter and recreational sectors continue to operate largely under input controls (season, area, and bag limits).1 Since the 1990s Gulf of Mexico red snapper has been managed 1
An exception is the 2014–2015 Gulf Headboat Collaborative rights-based management pilot program authorizing 19 federally permitted recreational headboats across the Gulf of Mexico to fish for red snapper and gag grouper year-round in exchange for adherence to individual allocations and enhanced monitoring requirements (Abbott & Willard, 2017). 2
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 1 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. red snapper Lutjanus campechanus) fishery. Fishery-independent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
SEAMAP plankton larval survey (1987-present)
Plankton survey used to estimate indices of spawning stock biomass.
VMS, Electronic logbooks (commercial)
SEAMAP video survey (most years since 1993)
Video survey on natural structure. Data used to estimate length composition, and ultimately age composition. ROV surveys used to estimate length composition samples. Multispecies bottom longline survey operated away from hard structure. Used to estimate relative indices of abundance and aid in collection of biological information. SEAMAP summer and fall trawl surveys. The summer survey indices date back to 1982 while the fall survey indices date to 1972. Used to derive age composition and obtain biological information.
Dealer reports (commercial)
Commercial boat required to hail in/out each trip, include vessel monitoring system onboard, and maintain a digital logbook. Coastal logbook program records catch and effort data in addition to estimating discards and annual operating costs. Divided into two indices: vertical line and longline. Catch reported digitally on per-trip basis; Dealers required to submit weekly electronic reports.
Artificial reef ROV survey (most years since 2005) NFMS bottom longline survey (1986-present)
SEAMAP summer and fall bottom trawl survey (1982 and 1972present, respectively)
Dockside intercepts Marine Recreational Information Program or MRIP approved state survey
State and federal agents conduct catch validation, biological sampling. On-site access point (cluster sampling) combined with mail based effort survey to estimate total recreational landings.
Southeast Region Headboat Survey
Currently required to submit weekly electronic reports
Shrimp bycatch fleet (east/ west, 1950/1946–2016, respectively)
Shrimp bycatch of juvenile red snapper estimated based on effort.
to the same river from where they were born (Quinn & Dittman, 1990). Sockeye are prosecuted via a limited-entry drift gillnet fishery, with a large variety of input controls (maximum boat length, maximum and minimum mesh size, net length/depth, fishable area, and time restrictions). Via radio, internet, or phone, fishers hear future fishing opportunities announced, and must make decisions about which river estuary and location to fish. For most of the season, temporal ‘transfer’ penalties are assessed for fishers who choose to switch to a new river estuary. Often, the decision to switch rivers at a certain point in time has extraordinary influence to the overall success of the boat for the season. If a boat makes a poor decision and misses high yield fishing opportunities due to being in the wrong river or sitting out a transfer penalty, it could cost many thousands of dollars. Salmon managers must constantly weigh multiple objectives. Biologists try to optimize reproductive potential while avoiding over escapement (more fish swimming upriver to spawn than the estimated carrying capacity of the upstream lake) and giving fishing opportunities to the commercial and subsistence license holders (Wang, Anderson, Cunningham, Hilborn, & Link, 2019). Attaining season-wide escapement within a pre-specified range depends on the accuracy and precision in estimating how many fish are headed to each river and how many fish have been or may soon be caught. To meet these objectives, managers use multiple independent data streams during the season (Table 2).
supplanted the telephone survey, purportedly providing more accurate effort estimates across a more representative sample of anglers (National Academies of Sciences, 2017). The Fishing Effort Survey collects information on the number and locations of angler trips. These data are combined with estimated catch rates and average fish sizes derived from Access Point Angler Intercept Survey of anglers returning from fishing trips at docks. With red snapper fishing seasons continuing to shrink in recent years, all five Gulf of Mexico states petitioned to redesign the recreational angler catch reporting system at state scales, asserting they could improve accuracy and give faster in-season accounting (National Marine Fisheries Service, 2017). With recent federal certification of the statistical merits of the state survey designs, states will be able to receive monitoring funding and vie to provide an improved product. Comparing the commercial IFQ and recreational sectors, more flexibility is provided by the increased monitoring and accountability standards on the commercial side. This incentive structure mutually benefits both management and industry. For recreational anglers, yearround fishing privilege comparable to that of their commercial counterparts would likely require comparable monitoring requirements. Unsurprisingly, Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper fishing seasons are short and unpredictable, and monitoring is minimal. More broadly, the push for state-specific (but federally certified) angler catch estimates suggests that state managers acknowledge a one-size-fits-all approach may not sufficiently address differences across the region in fishing practices, socioeconomic needs, or biology. Further, knowing that federal management decisions are based on data from local sources may give stakeholders more confidence in their accuracy and appropriateness.
3.2. Monitoring program The first indices of salmon abundance come from the Port Moller Test Fishery (PMTF), a stratified gillnet survey in the salmon migration path approximately 200 km from the destined river mouths (Raborn & Link, 2018). Operated during the migration, the gillnet survey provides indication of age and size composition in addition to near real-time genetic analysis. After salmon are caught and allometric measurements are taken, tissue samples are sent to a laboratory, where in short order (< 24 h), scientists can determine the age and native rivers of the sampled fish (Eggers et al., 2011). The process effectively creates daily river- and age-specific abundance indices. Managers then track the PMTF indices to estimate the timing for salmon to traverse to their natal river mouth, where the commercial fishery operates, usually between 6 and 9 days. As more data come in, managers refine their estimated travel time and run trajectory, furthering their ability to anticipate run strength and prescribe appropriate fishing efforts.
3. Near real-time genetic and run evaluation for sockeye salmon in Alaska 3.1. Fishery overview Bristol Bay, Alaska, hosts the world's largest and most lucrative sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) fishery. Not coincidentally, the fishery exhibits some of the most sophisticated, comprehensive, and heavily enforced management regimes found globally. Each summer over a period of about eight weeks, sockeye salmon enter one of five large river systems after 1–4 years of feeding hiatus in the North Pacific Ocean (Groot & Margolis, 1991). Notably, almost all salmon will return 3
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 2 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Fisheryindependent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
Port Moller test fishery
Stratified gillnet survey operating 6–9 salmon travel days from the commercial fishery (~200 km). Collects allometric information. With scale reading and near real-time genetic component, provides daily age- and river-specific abundance indices. Aerial surveys operated by state management facilitates estimates of en-route and in-river salmon.
Daily commercial landings
Commercial catch must be landed daily. Fishers receive receipt “fish tickets” at each delivery.
Commercial test fishery
Counting towers provide river-specific estimates of upstream fish passage. Counts help refine escapement estimate.
Dealer reports
State enforcement may select a small subset of boats to fish during closed periods for a pre-determined amount of time. Provides estimate of CPUE and allows partial cost-recovery for enforcement. Dealers required to submit daily reports (sum of all “fish tickets” including estimated number of fish and species composition.
Aerial surveys
Counting towers
4. Multi-life stage monitoring of American lobster
primarily in New England and maritime Canada, with catch records dating back to the early 1800's (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). Due to a combination of factors including a favorable climate regime, fishing regulations, and decreased predation, abundance has increased exponentially since the early 1990's (Acheson & Knight, 2000). The transboundary lobster fishery is managed through the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which spans 15 states from Florida northward to Maine. Of the most productive regions of lobster fishing is the U.S. state of Maine (Fig. 1). In Maine, lobster is far and away the most valuable fishery, dominating the market with 76.2% of the total ex-vessel fisheries value in 2018 (Maine DMR, 2018). For this state alone, annual ex-vessel landings in recent years have been worth roughly 500 million USD. We will focus our attention on the monitoring efforts of Maine and how they contribute to the ASMFC stock assessment. A swift change trophic structure (Ames, 2004), coupled with abrupt climate change (Mills et al., 2013), has had and will continue to have large effects on lobster phenology and management (Mazur, Li, Chang, & Chen, 2019). American lobsters, like many other crustaceans evolved under conditions of intense predation (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). Biological attributes such as high fecundity, a large degree of parental care, and a formidable chelated exoskeleton no doubt contribute to high reproductive success. Moreover, the dramatic decline of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in the early 1990's and the relatively low diversity of the Gulf of Maine (Witman, Etter, & Smith, 2004) has likely facilitated the 3-4-fold increase in lobster during that time. Mechanistically, lobster have succeeded via mesopredator release, extensive consumption of bait (Grabowski et al., 2010), and more favorable thermal conditions over the majority of their range (Le Bris, 2018). Currently, elucidating when and if lobster population will stabilize or decrease is an important topic of study. The limited-entry commercial fishery operates largely through input controls. In all but one of Maine's seven lobster management zones, individuals may fish 800 traps year-round in state waters, and into federal waters if the captain possesses a federal permit. Lobsters are regulated via a slot limit (minimum and maximum size), along with a prohibition on the retention of egg-bearing females. Additionally, fishers are required to ‘V-notch’ the tail of egg bearing females before release to protect the spawning stock. For many subsequent molts, the female lobster will retain evidence of the notch and these individuals will remain illegal to land. Fortunately, discarding of sub- or super-legal individuals results in mortality rates close to zero (National Marine Fisheries Service, 2009). Because of the regulations and high discard survival, the fishery retains valuable spawners in the population and provides a good platform to sample catches for biological information.
4.1. Fishery overview
4.2. Monitoring program
In recent years, the most valuable fishery in the Americas has been American lobster (Homarus americanus). This species is caught
Due to the biology and behavior of lobsters, life history monitoring and assessment is a challenging task. Lobster shed their external hard
Due to the tendency of sockeye to travel in large schools and occupy the upper portion of the water column, accurate aerial surveys of both at-sea and in-river salmon abundance are conducted regularly, further aiding management decision making. Finally, salmon counting towers for the main rivers and some tributaries give another valuable line of information. River-specific catch data from the salmon buyers is reported daily to management, and overall catches and survey results are disseminated to stakeholders and the public daily via reports, public radio announcements, and website updates. In the river mouth area where commercial fishing is permitted, enforcement may select a small number of commercial boats as a ‘test fishery’ before formal openings. Selected vessels fish for a pre-determined amount of time without competition from others. Catches are reported to management, and the revenue of the test fishery is split between the fisher and the observer, the latter helping to cover management operating costs. Fishers benefit by fine tuning their fishing strategy, while management gains valuable CPUE information and cost recovery. The normal commercial fishery reports catches for every delivery made, usually 1–2 times per day. Upon delivery of catch to a tender vessel (buyer), total catch is reported from the tender to management, including estimates of total number of fish. Fishers retain a ‘fish ticket’ receipt from each transaction for personal records and verification. In parallel with the high investment in fisheries monitoring, significant resources are funneled towards enforcement. During any individual fishery opening in peak season (early July), management may use helicopters, planes, rigid hull inflatables, and undercover boats to ensure compliance (R. Boenish, personal observations). Penalties for gear infractions or fishing outside of the legal spatial or temporal bounds are severe, ranging from large fines, to loss of fishing privilege, to prosecution and boat and/or catch confiscation (State of Alaska, 2019). Funding for management and enforcement comes from a variety of sources. The PMTF receives the majority of funding from a percentage tax on selling fish and from fish processors. The value of near real-time run data and forecasts is large enough to warrant investment from fishers and the processing sector. This, in turn, helps provide management with more resources and facilitates an accurate and precise method for run-management. Together, all sectors benefit from transparency (access to data) to the extent that they may work together and co-invest in fine-scale management. It is uncommon to see such substantial industry investment in fisheries monitoring in a largely inputcontrolled fishery.
4
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Fig. 1. Location of the three U.S. fishery case studies (from top-right, clockwise): American lobster (Homarus americanus) in the Gulf of Maine, red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) in the Gulf of Mexico, and sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Table 3 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. American lobster (Homarus americanus) in Maine, including federal waters. Fishery-independent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
State larvae survey pilot (2018present)
Random-stratified sampling design (surface tows) produces abundance indices of lobster larval and characterizes developmental stage.
Sea sampling survey (cooperative with industry) (1985- present)
Settlement survey- SCUBA suction and passive sampling methods (2001present) Ventless trap survey (cooperative with industry) (2006-present) Inshore trawl survey (Fall 2000present)
Settled larvae are sampled with a SCUBA diving survey where an underwater siphon is used to enumerate individuals found within specified quadrats. The SCUBA survey is complimented with passive sampling. Random-stratified ventless trap survey to monitor sublegal lobsters. Region-specific indices are used as an indicator for the future abundance of legal lobsters. Since 2000, Maine and its neighboring state, New Hampshire have jointly operated a biannual (spring and fall) inshore trawl survey. Indices inform lobster management for both juvenile and adult lobster abundance. Since 1963, federal operation of regional multispecies bottom trawl survey has provided spring and fall abundance surveys.
Federal observer trips
Volunteer lobstermen take state observers aboard for trips at no individual cost. While the observer is aboard, lobstermen and their crew haul traps as they normally would. Biological information of each lobster caught is recorded (size, sex, maturity, presence of shell disease). Most samples come from the months in which the lobster fishery is most active (May–Nov). In offshore waters, limited federal observers measure biological information (similar to sea sampling survey).
Federal regional spring/fall trawl survey (1963-present)
Commercial catch/ Dealer reports Harvester reports
Catch is sold to registered buyers, or is otherwise accounted. Dealers are required to submit weekly reports. 10% of lobstermen are randomly selected by license type to fill logbooks detailing approximate location, effort, and catch.
samples of the different stages in life history is not straightforward. However, in this region, state and federal agencies work together to conduct a mix of fishery-dependent and -independent surveys spanning the lobster's entire life history (Table 3). Fishery-independent data for the lobster population span the entirety of the species' life history. For newly hatched larvae, the Maine
parts during ecdysis (molting), and currently there is no effective aging method available. Additionally, lobsters tend to be cryptic and are known to undergo extensive ontogenetic niche shifts (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). As they grow, they become less vulnerable to predation and may choose to reside at different depths or different sediment types (Wahle & Steneck, 1992). Because of these factors, obtaining representative 5
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
include meetings between stakeholders and management to determine data needs and design systems, participation in fishery-dependent surveys, review and application of monitoring results, and other tactics. Finally, effective incentive structures are essential, and should including financial, social, and other dimensions. While in many ways discrete, these three essential elements of monitoring are not independent. For example, if industry partially funds a monitoring program, they effectively enhance their own engagement and may further their stake in monitoring design. With sufficient engagement, emerging management opportunities originate in part from the industry. For example, some of the most strict conservation measures for American lobster such as v-notching and others were industry suggestions (Daniel, Bayer, & Waltz, 1989). Recent work suggests that these measures, informed by on the water experience, enhance the resource (Acheson & Knight, 2000; Le Bris et al., 2018; Mazur et al., 2019) and will contribute to resilience in the face of climate change (Le Bris et al., 2018; Mazur et al., 2019). Similarly, the transition to limited entry and accompanying conservation measures in the Bristol Bay salmon fishery was initiated by the industry alongside management (Raborn & Link, 2018). Finally, engaging with the red snapper commercial industry about how to structure the IFQ system contributed to the effectiveness of the system and rebuilding of the stock. It is clear that industry engagement has potential to spill over into both an improved incentive structure and design scheme. The three case studies span considerable ranges of industry and management structure. For example, two of the fisheries operate - at least in part - throughout the entire year, but only commercial red snapper has any true output controls. Management for all fisheries is under the jurisdiction of similar federal or state authorities, but differences in design and strategy reflect differences in ecology, operations and fishery objectives. Notably, only the red snapper fishery grapples with a significant recreational allocation, though that might in part reflect geography and accessibility as Maine and Alaska are among the most remote and least populous states. Congruencies among social and biological outcomes are integral to the success of monitoring in all of these fisheries. All have a strong focus on understanding organism life history and ontology, and draw upon a mix of fishery-dependent and independent data. Because understanding organism life history is of interest to many parties, in most cases, information is made accessible to the public. These data help scientists understand the natural systems and aid in development of reliable stock forecasting. For the fishers and supply chain actors, reliable forecasts can aid in making business decisions and financial planning. Moreover, conducting a mixture of both fishery-dependent and -independent surveys can help scientists develop new ideas and further their conceptual understanding of the social-ecological system. Cooperative design and implementation of surveys, especially using fishing vessels, provides invaluable opportunities for positive interactions between industry and science (NRC, 2003). Effective incorporation of incentives can enhance compliance and maintained cooperation. We identified three major types of incentives that can be incorporated into fishery monitoring: financial, social, and joint funding. Financial benefits or consequences include penalties for non-compliance, access to data that enable more confident market decisions, and improving management to allow increased fishing opportunities. Social incentives can carry similar weight to financial incentives, and often focus on stakeholder trust in the science. For example, Runnebaum et al. (2018) found that stakeholders find science more credible when they understand the methods. Ways to foster this trust include industry participation in monitoring design, implementation, and funding. Shared funding responsibilities can be especially important, but may not be popular and therefore may not be implemented by policymakers without benefits being clearly perceived. However, if implemented effectively, co-investment in monitoring can provide an additional platform for communication between industry, scientists, and management, with industry having an increased stake in
Department of Marine Resources (DMR) has piloted a small mesh larval sampling survey since 2018 in four historic sites to produce fisheryindependent lobster larvae abundance indices. Recently settled lobsters or ‘young of year’ are sampled via a SCUBA diving survey. Researchers use an underwater siphon to enumerate settled lobsters residing within sampled quadrats coast-wide, which results in spatially-explicit abundance indices. Consistent suction sampling time series date back to 2001. Next, region-specific indices of life history stages from juvenile through adult are obtained from a random-stratified ventless trap survey. Unlike commercial lobster traps, which are equipped with escape vents to allow the release of juveniles, this survey operates standardized traps without vents. As expected, these traps catch a high proportion of juvenile lobsters, indices for which can be used to predict the future abundance of legal lobsters. The final fishery-independent data are from state and federal trawl surveys. Since 1963, the U.S. federal government has operated a larger-scale regional spring and fall bottom trawl survey. Due to commercial trap congestion, the large trawl is generally unable to operate in Maine nearshore waters. To address this gap, Maine and its neighboring state of New Hampshire have jointly operated a smaller scale fishery-independent inshore trawl survey in the spring and fall to generate complementary data stream on both juvenile and adult abundance. In addition to the fisheries-independent monitoring programs, important data also come from the Maine Lobster Sea Sampling program. Volunteer lobstermen take state observers aboard day trips at no individual cost, and observers collect data as lobstermen and their crew haul traps as they normally would. Depending on the license held by the lobsterman, sampling may span both state and federal waters. Biological information from each lobster caught is recorded (size, sex, maturity, presence of V-notch or shell disease). While the sea sampling program operates year-round, most samples come from the months in which the lobster fishery is most active. Additionally, for federal permit holders, federal observers operate a similar, but smaller scale, obligatory fishery-dependent data collection survey in both state and federal waters. The amount of federal observer coverage is based on the availability of resources and need to monitor bycatch rates of groundfish, especially Atlantic cod and Cusk, Brosme brosme. In the further offshore waters, trips may last for one up to a few days. For finer-scale spatial information, port-based dealer report data are collected by state and federal managers accounting for 100% of transactions, and 10% of lobstermen are randomly selected by license type to regularly report spatial and CPUE data. While dealers are required to report only landings and price, lobstermen reports are more detailed. Their logbooks include spatial data, catch, and the number of traps hauled. Not unlike most regions in the United States, the funding for lobster monitoring comes from outside of industry. However, unlike the other fisheries considered herein, there are no financial or other direct benefits to participants tied to direct monitoring outcomes (e.g., longer fishing season). Cooperation by lobstermen in the monitoring program is likely due to recognition that the overall performance of the management program is positive, supported by incentives and trust ingrained in the culture and traditions of the fishery (Acheson, 1988). 5. Discussion Our review of the monitoring programs in these case study fisheries highlights what we argue are three major deterministic categories of monitoring success (Table 4). First of course is the institutional and technical design of a program. This includes jurisdictional congruency, or at least working relationships between bodies. In the cases presented, continually evolving jurisdictional working relationships are essential to a robust monitoring design. We believe this to be true regardless of scale (local, state, federal, and international). Second, initial and continued engagement with industry is crucial to not only furthering monitoring science, but to build and continue the necessary relationships between resources users and management. Engagement can 6
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 4 Critical attributes of monitoring systems for three U.S fisheries: American lobster, sockeye salmon, and red snapper. Monitoring designs are divided into three sections: Design, Engagement, and Incentive structures (blue, green, and purple, respectively). An “X” denotes a fishery satisfies a monitoring metric. Note, at the time of writing this manuscript, the red snapper fishery state pilots are not all federally certified, hence the absence of an “X”. We anticipate an eventual change..
in improved survey coverage and data resolution. What should be done about the other end of the incentive spectrum? Conversely, monitoring incentives should penalize bad actors, such as those who misrepresent or hide behavior that would introduce greater restrictions. Managers must strive to find a balance between creating penalties sufficient to broadly encourage compliance, but doing so while building stakeholder buy-in. Additionally, with broad stakeholder buy-in for addressing critical issues, avoiding new problems, such species becoming protected or endangered, may result in lower burdens for both management and stakeholders.
the process. An important opportunity for reducing costs and improving data streams is through new and efficient monitoring technologies. Undoubtedly, fisheries monitoring is in a transition from paper logbooks, intermittent dockside sampling, and other low-tech approaches that are subject to errors, inconsistency, and limited coverage, to a new generation of digital logbooks, traceability technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence to estimate catch composition and volume, and satellite tracking, among others. In some instances, increased oversight through technological tools is generating privacy and cost concerns, but elsewhere is being met with excitement about costeffectiveness, reduced risks to both fishers and observers, and other benefits. We expect that the trend toward implementation of technological solutions will continue, and eventually will reduce overall monitoring costs while improving scientific and management performance. Although improving monitoring can increase fishing opportunities, it also has potential to reduce fishing opportunities in certain circumstances. For example, with limited monitoring, the full extent of fishery practices such as discarding might be underestimated, especially if the discarded species is rare. In such cases, industry might rightly suspect that increased monitoring would result in new restrictions to conserve the bycatch species. This outcome is unfortunate, particularly in the case where industry is a monitoring proponent. In some respects, industry may feel ‘punished’ for making monitoring commitments in good faith. However, eventually the ecological or policy implications of depletion that had gone unobserved will more often than not impose severe socio-economic impacts on the fishery. Therefore, early detection and response to these issues enabled by effective monitoring have both long- and shrt-term benefits. For incentives to be successful, the general model should be to reward monitoring investments conducted in good faith. As was seen in the red snapper commercial sector, introduction of multiple enhanced monitoring techniques enables increased fishing privilege (near yearround fishing opportunity, flexibility for fishers to harness markets to increase profits), and because the rebuilding is so far successful (Reference biomass has increased 3.3-fold from 2000 to 2016) (SEDAR, 2018), annual quotas have been increasing. In this example, the bundling of fishing privileges with enhanced monitoring responsibilities created positive incentives for compliance, ultimately resulting
6. Conclusions Examining similarities and differences in fisheries monitoring across case studies provides an opportunity to identify elements of success or failure for a monitoring scheme. Monitoring is inherently an interdisciplinary endeavor, which involves deep thinking and continuous work from a variety of actors. We have drawn from examples of fisheries targeting species with different life histories, exploitation histories, and management structure, but acknowledge that these do not span the complete spectrum of biological and management contexts. For example, the three case study fisheries are well-developed with high economic value and are relatively data-rich by global standards. Of course, the exception to these attributes within our case studies serves to illustrate that a mix fishery-dependent and -independent data can promote success. The recreational red snapper is the most dysfunctional and contentious among our examples, and also the one with the sparsest monitoring, most deteriorated political relationships, and weakest incentives. Ideally, the design, engagement strategy, and incentive structure are laid out early in the process of fishery exploitation, but unfortunately this is rarely the case. Further, changes in management, particularly reductions in fishing opportunities, are rarely well-received. Management reforms therefore almost inherently will face pressures to maintain the status quo, and fisheries management must grapple with stabilizing social systems that depend on biological systems unlikely ever to be at equilibrium. With increasing environmental threats and prospects of shifting definitions of ‘normal’, the need for continual conversation and feedback between industry and management cannot be overstated, nor can the importance of timely and granular data on 7
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
social, economic, and environmental conditions. Despite the difficulties, clear successes are possible through continued work on management design, consistent and earnest engagement, and consideration of incentives. The two-way street is volatile at times, but is crucial for successful monitoring and long-term fishery success.
evaluate the robustness of current management regulations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2018-0122 (in press). Mills, K., Pershing, A., Brown, C., Chen, Y., Chiang, F.-S., Holland, D., et al. (2013). Fisheries management in a changing climate: Lessons from the 2012 ocean heat wave in the Northwest Atlantic. Oceanography, 26. https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog. 2013.27. Myers, R. A., Hutchings, J. A., & Barrowman, N. J. (1997). WHY do FISH stocks collapse? The example OF cod IN Atlantic Canada. Ecological Applications, 7, 91–106. https:// doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761 (1997)007[0091:WDFSCT]2.0.CO;2. National Academies of Sciences (2017). Review of the marine recreational information program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Marine Fisheries Service (2009). Final environmental assessment final regulatory impact review and final regulatory flexibility analysis of mandatory federal lobster dealer reporting and broodstock protection measures. Silver Springs, MD: NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service (2017). Certification of marine recreational information program (MRIP) fishing survey method for LA Creel. MD: Silver Springs. NOAA Southeast Regional Office (2019). Historical Overview (1800s-present): How has the red snapper fishery changed over time? . NRC (2003). Cooperative research in the national marine fisheries Service. Washington, D.C: National Academies Presshttps://doi.org/10.17226/10836. Ocean Conservancy et al. Ross, v. (2017). Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133. Petitgas, P. (2001). Geostatistics BlackwellScience,Ltd in fisheries survey design and stock assessment: Models, variances and applications. Fish and Fisheries, 19. Pinsky, M. L., Worm, B., Fogarty, M. J., Sarmiento, J. L., & Levin, S. A. (2013). Marine taxa track local climate velocities. Science, 341, 1239–1242. https://doi.org/10. 1126/science.1239352. Quinn, T. P., & Dittman, A. H. (1990). Pacific salmon mirgrations and homing: Mechanisms and adaptive significance. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 5, 174–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(90)90205-R. Raborn, S. W., & Link, M. R. (2018). Annual report for the 2018 port Moller test fisheryBristol Bay Fisheries Collaborative, Dillingham, AK: Bristol Bay Science and Research Institute. Runnebaum, J. M., Maxwell, E. A., Stoll, J. S., Pianka, K. E., & Oppenheim, N. G. (2018). Communication, relationships, and relatability influence stakeholder perceptions of credible science. Fisherieshttps://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10214. SEDAR (2018). Stock assessment report Gulf of Mexico red snapper (No. 52)North Charleston, SC: SEDAR. State of Alaska (2019). Alaska State Statute. 16.05.190. Steneck, R. S., & Wahle, R. A. (2013). American lobster dynamics in a brave new ocean. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 70, 1612–1624. https://doi.org/10. 1139/cjfas-2013-0094. Stokesbury, K. D. E., Cadrin, S. X., Calabrese, N., Keiley, E., Lowery, T. M., Rothschild, B. J., et al. (2017). Towards an improved system for sampling new England groundfish using video technology. Fisheries, 42, 432–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415. 2017.1342630. U.S.. (2009). Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. 16 U.S.C. ch.38 § 1801 et seq. . Wahle, R. A., & Steneck, R. S. (1992). Habitat restrictions in early benthic life: Experiments on habitat selection and in situ predation with the American lobster. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 157, 91–114. https://doi.org/10. 1016/0022-0981(92)90077-N. Wang, J. Y.-L., Anderson, C. M., Cunningham, C. J., Hilborn, R., & Link, M. R. (2019). Does more fish mean more money? Evaluating alternative escapement goals in the Bristol Bay salmon fishery. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 76, 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2017-0336. Wilbur, H. M. (1980). Complex life cycles. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11, 67–93. Witman, J. D., Etter, R. J., & Smith, F. (2004). The relationship between regional and local species diversity in marine benthic communities: A global perspective. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101, 15664–15669. https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.0404300101.
Acknowledgements We thank Andrew Goode, Burton Shank, Glenn Chamberlain, and Robert Watts for helpful comments and clarifications on state and federal American lobster monitoring programs. We further thank Jessica Stephen for helpful comments on Gulf of Mexico red snapper monitoring programs. This research was supported through the High Meadows Foundation, Kravis Scientific Research Fund. The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Abbott, J. K., & Willard, D. (2017). Rights based management for recreational for-hire fisheries: Evidence from a policy trial. Fisheries Research, 196, 106–116. Acheson, J. M. (1988). The lobster gangs of Maine (1st ed.). Durham, NH: University Press of New England. Acheson, J. M., & Knight, J. (2000). Distribution fights, coordination games, and lobster management. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 42, 209–238. Daniel, P. C., Bayer, R. C., & Waltz, C. (1989). Egg production of V-notched American lobsters (Homarus americanus) along coastal Maine. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 9, 77. https://doi.org/10.2307/1548449. Dunn, D. C., Jablonicky, C., Crespo, G. O., McCauley, D. J., Kroodsma, D. A., Boerder, K., et al. (2018). Empowering high seas governance with satellite vessel tracking data. Fish and Fisheries, 19, 729–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12285. Eggers, D. M., Witteveen, M. J., Baker, T. T., Evenson, D. F., Berger, J. M., Hoyt, H. A., et al. (2011). Results from sampling the 2006-2009 commercial and subsistence fisheries int he Western Alaska Salmon Stock Identification Project. Alaska Department of Fish and Game Special Publications No. 10–11. Farmer, N. A., Malinowski, R. P., McGovern, M. F., & Rubec, P. J. (2016). Stock complexes for fisheries management in the gulf of Mexico. Mar. Coast. Fish. 8, 177–201. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19425120.2015.1024359. Gaines, S. D., Costello, C., Owashi, B., Mangin, T., Bone, J., Molinos, J. G., et al. (2018). Improved fisheries management could offset many negative effects of climate change. Sci. Adv. 9. Grabowski, J. H., Clesceri, E. J., Baukus, A. J., Gaudette, J., Weber, M., & Yund, P. O. (2010). Use of herring bait to farm lobsters in the gulf of Maine. PLoS One, 5, e10188. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010188. Groot, C., & Margolis, L. (1991). Pacific salmon life histories: Life history of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Vancouver: University of Birttish Columbia Press. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248. https://doi. org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243. Le Bris, A., Mills, K. E., Wahle, R. A., Chen, Y., Alexander, M. A., Allyn, A. J., et al. (2018). Climate vulnerability and resilience in the most valuable North American fishery. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 1831–1836. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.1711122115. Linton, B. (2012). Shrimp fishery bycatch estimates for Gulf of Mexico red snapper, 19722011 (No. SEDAR31-DW30). Miami, FL: NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Maine, D. M. R. (2018). Maine commercial landings. ME, USA: Maine Department of Marine Resources. Mazur, M., Li, B., Chang, J. H., & Chen, Y. (2019). Using an Individual-based model to simulate the gulf of Maine American Lobster (Homarus americanus) fishery and
8
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Aquaculture and Fisheries journal homepage: http://www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/ aquaculture-and-fisheries
Fisheries monitoring: Perspectives from the United States Robert Boenisha,∗, Daniel Willardb, Jacob P. Kritzera, Kathleen Reardonc a b c
Environmental Defense Fund, 18 Tremont St. Suite 850, Boston, MA, 02108, USA Environmental Defense Fund, 301 Congress Ave. Suite 1300, Austin, TX, 78701, USA Maine Department of Marine Resources, 194 McKown Point Rd, West Boothbay Harbor, ME, 04575, USA
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Fisheries Fisheries monitoring Fisheries management Sustainability
Fisheries monitoring in the United States exists in many forms and serves many functions due to geographically varying objectives, practices, technology, institutional structures, and funding. In the U.S and abroad, diverse catch methods commonly exist for the same stock, thus monitoring and reporting strategies need to be tailored to unique operational needs. Common management challenges include funding limitation, survey design, coverage, and implementation. We describe three innovative examples of fisheries monitoring in the United States. These stories of success and failure can inform the design and implementation of new monitoring pilots and aid crafting both regional and national policies. We explore the innovative vessel monitoring and electronic logbook practices across multiple sectors for Gulf of Mexico red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus). Then, we examine a unique monitoring program that produces critical, near real-time genetic and population surveys for sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Our final case study describes the many fishery-dependent and -independent data streams for American lobster (Homarus americanus) in New England. Across all monitoring cases exists an explicit focus on the most critical aspects of organism life history. We find strong cross-institutional working relationships and adept agency coordination are imperatives in instances of stocks occupying multiple state or federal boundaries. Our results suggest the most effective approaches address the unique data needs of a fishery, and for this, thorough understanding of both biological and socioeconomic aspects of the fishery is a prerequisite. Ultimately, the monitoring program should jointly incentivize compliance while promoting continued and evolving interaction between resources users, scientists, and management.
1. Introduction The footprint of wild capture fisheries is global, the harvest methods are diverse, and similarly, so are management and monitoring regimes. It is clear from decades of fisheries over-exploitation and substantial ecosystem and climate changes that responsible management and monitoring are needed to maintain productive ocean ecosystems (Gaines et al., 2018). If left unmanaged and in absence of a common pool resource management system (Ostrom, 2009) fisheries can be a failure of the commons (sensu Hardin, 1968). How can we best monitor a fishery? The first and most obvious step is to consider the population dynamics of the species in question. This includes measurable variables such as growth rate, reproduction, mortality, and spatio-temporal patterns. Given that aquatic organisms commonly go through complex life histories (Wilbur, 1980), the first step generates particular challenges and uncertainties. Thus, it is necessary to identify key stages of life history that produce valuable signals of stock trends. The design of a monitoring program should aim to
∗
capture dynamics of both biological and spatio-temporal trends due to the near certainty that fisheries and ontogeny operate in different spatial extents and scales (Petitgas, 2001). The next, and maybe not as obvious consideration is the monitoring of the harvest process itself. To understand how fishers prosecute the resources, at a minimum one must consider a certain seasonality component, the magnitude of fishing effort, and a measure of catch or catch efficiency. Beyond simple metrics, engagement with industry and continual efforts to understand ‘on the water’ dynamics can be invaluable and pay dividends for compliance with regulation and participation in monitoring (Runnebaum, Maxwell, Stoll, Pianka, & Oppenheim, 2018). Biased fishery information can generate large uncertainties and poor management advice (Myers, Hutchings, & Barrowman, 1997). Therefore, data quality issues are of primary concern for all parties (science, management, and industry). Unfortunately, these data are often hard to obtain for technical, financial, and social reasons. Additional challenges arise due to the inherent nature of simultaneously navigating complex biological and social systems. As is becoming
Corresponding author. Environmental Defense Fund, 18 Tremont St. Suite 850, Boston, MA, 02108, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Boenish).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaf.2019.10.002 Received 28 March 2019; Received in revised form 19 July 2019; Accepted 9 October 2019 2468-550X/ © 2019 Shanghai Ocean University. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
Please cite this article as: Robert Boenish, et al., Aquaculture and Fisheries, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaf.2019.10.002
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
under a series of rebuilding plans imposing limits on directed fishing mortality and shrimp trawl bycatch mortality (Linton, 2012). As the stock has been rebuilding and quotas have been increasing in recent years, the average size of fish caught by recreational fishers has increased, causing their allocated quota to be reached faster. Several Gulf of Mexico states have opened state waters to recreational red snapper fishing for extended periods while federal waters are closed, leaving less quota available for federal seasons. Accordingly, recreational overharvests have been common and fishing seasons for red snapper have shortened considerably in recent years (NOAA Southeast Regional Office, 2019). In 2017, the private recreational fishing season was shortened to just three days (from around 200 as recently as 2008), causing political strife, and eventually a federal intervention to extend the fishing season, followed by litigation to overturn it (Ocean Conservancy et al. & Ross, 2017). Conversely, with the IFQ system, commercial fishers are given flexibility to target snapper year-round when it makes economic sense in exchange for enhanced reporting and monitoring requirements.
abundantly clear globally, wide spatial or seasonal distributions will increasingly require multilateral monitoring efforts, spanning provincial to multinational agreements (Pinsky, Worm, Fogarty, Sarmiento, & Levin, 2013). Because of the many state boundaries, productive and valuable fisheries, and long history of leadership in fisheries science and monitoring, we will focus our efforts on the United States. The United States currently manages nearly 500 marine fisheries (NOAA, 2018) spanning all of its coastal and shelf waters, and therefore provides diverse and illustrative case studies in different approaches to monitoring. Via the Magnuson Stevens Act (U.S., 2009) and its subsequent reauthorizations, a system of eight regional management councils and six science centers provide the foundation for U.S. federal fisheries management. Importantly, this system is designed to work in coordination with state agencies and relevant international partnerships to provide data and perspectives for the entire spatial extent of a stock. Beyond jurisdictional challenges, considerable technical challenges are often some of the largest hurdles to achieving a robust monitoring program. Because of the large geographical range and complexities of many organisms’ life histories, and the social and tactical norms of fishers, fisheries monitoring can take many forms and functions. Additionally, institutional structure, incentives, and funding can play important roles. Differing and competing technologies are being implemented for monitoring, including random catch sampling, mandatory reporting, on-vessel observers, artificial intelligence (Stokesbury et al., 2017), and satellite boat tracking (Dunn et al., 2018). With all of these challenges, robust design of management with consideration of life history and available technology is an important first step, to be followed by established and continued interaction between resource users and management to create a broad range of compliance incentives. In this paper we highlight three diverse case studies from the United States to critically examine innovation, successes, and limitations to monitoring strategy effectiveness. We synthesize and draw themes across a spectrum of gears, biology, geography, and exploitation history to extract general lessons for monitoring program development.
2.2. Monitoring program In total, red snapper is monitored by a combination of five fisheryindependent and three fishery-dependent surveys, landings reports, and dockside validation (Table 1). The various surveys and reports are conducted by different federal, state, and university partners, delivering timely biological and economic data to managers through digital and physical reporting measures. Fishing for commercial red snapper and other species in the Gulf of Mexico IFQ program involves several enhanced monitoring requirements. First, each fisher is required to hail out/and hail in for each trip, to not only better signal fishing effort but also to increase accountability (being caught fishing without hailing out is an easily observed infraction). While at sea, vessels are tracked with vessel monitoring systems. Second, after a trip, red snapper and other IFQ species must be reported through an online IFQ system using a landing transaction site. After landings are submitted by the dealer, they must be verified by the fisher. Transactions must be entered within 96 h of the hail-in notification or on the day of offload, whichever occurs sooner. The online system can then be used for real-time quota tracking, trading, and analysis by management and the users. For any Gulf of Mexico species in federal management (including those not in the IFQ program), dealers are required to submit weekly electronic trip tickets to the online system. This step is redundant for red snapper and other IFQ species but it provides managers with catch monitoring data for other managed species. Third, fishers must report red snapper and other federally managed species’ landings in paper-based coastal logbook vessel trip reports (VTRs). VTRs record additional catch and effort characteristics about the trip. Finally, state and federal dockside sampling efforts and the Reef Fish Observer Program provide catch validation and biological samples for stock assessment. Non-target catches of red snapper from other commercial fisheries, such as from shrimp trawling, are included from anterior observer programs (SEDAR, 2018). The recreational sectors on the other hand have long had less monitoring responsibility. Monitoring standards vary by recreational mode. In the recreational for-hire fishery, covering over 1300 federally permitted vessels, limited charter vessel catch and effort data are sampled by telephone through the federal Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) For-Hire Survey. In contrast, the full census of approximately 70 Gulf of Mexico headboats – generally large recreational for-hire vessels pricing trips by the “head” – were required to submit trip-level paper logbooks monthly to the NOAA Southeast Region Headboat Survey beginning in 1986 and currently are required to submit trip-level electronic logbooks weekly. The lowest monitoring standards have been required of the vast and diffuse private recreational fishery. Traditionally, private recreational monitoring has been operated by MRIP, via a combination of dockside sampling and a telephone survey. Recently, the mail-based Fishing Effort Survey
2. Vessel monitoring and electronic logbook practices in the Gulf of Mexico 2.1. Fishery overview Perhaps the most iconic fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) has been the target of commercial exploitation since the 1840's but suffered a severe population crash by the 1990's due to growing commercial and recreational catch and shrimp trawl bycatch (SEDAR, 2018). Red snapper's rich history and high culinary value have established its cultural and economic importance in the Southeastern United States. Management for this species spans five separate states and federal waters (Farmer, Malinowski, McGovern, & Rubec, 2016). Annual quotas are allocated to three sectors: the commercial fleet (51%), limited entry federally permitted for-hire charter fishing operators (20.73%), and regulated open access private anglers (28.27%). Notably, the commercial sector has operated under an individual fishing quota (IFQ) system since 2007, while the charter and recreational sectors continue to operate largely under input controls (season, area, and bag limits).1 Since the 1990s Gulf of Mexico red snapper has been managed 1
An exception is the 2014–2015 Gulf Headboat Collaborative rights-based management pilot program authorizing 19 federally permitted recreational headboats across the Gulf of Mexico to fish for red snapper and gag grouper year-round in exchange for adherence to individual allocations and enhanced monitoring requirements (Abbott & Willard, 2017). 2
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 1 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. red snapper Lutjanus campechanus) fishery. Fishery-independent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
SEAMAP plankton larval survey (1987-present)
Plankton survey used to estimate indices of spawning stock biomass.
VMS, Electronic logbooks (commercial)
SEAMAP video survey (most years since 1993)
Video survey on natural structure. Data used to estimate length composition, and ultimately age composition. ROV surveys used to estimate length composition samples. Multispecies bottom longline survey operated away from hard structure. Used to estimate relative indices of abundance and aid in collection of biological information. SEAMAP summer and fall trawl surveys. The summer survey indices date back to 1982 while the fall survey indices date to 1972. Used to derive age composition and obtain biological information.
Dealer reports (commercial)
Commercial boat required to hail in/out each trip, include vessel monitoring system onboard, and maintain a digital logbook. Coastal logbook program records catch and effort data in addition to estimating discards and annual operating costs. Divided into two indices: vertical line and longline. Catch reported digitally on per-trip basis; Dealers required to submit weekly electronic reports.
Artificial reef ROV survey (most years since 2005) NFMS bottom longline survey (1986-present)
SEAMAP summer and fall bottom trawl survey (1982 and 1972present, respectively)
Dockside intercepts Marine Recreational Information Program or MRIP approved state survey
State and federal agents conduct catch validation, biological sampling. On-site access point (cluster sampling) combined with mail based effort survey to estimate total recreational landings.
Southeast Region Headboat Survey
Currently required to submit weekly electronic reports
Shrimp bycatch fleet (east/ west, 1950/1946–2016, respectively)
Shrimp bycatch of juvenile red snapper estimated based on effort.
to the same river from where they were born (Quinn & Dittman, 1990). Sockeye are prosecuted via a limited-entry drift gillnet fishery, with a large variety of input controls (maximum boat length, maximum and minimum mesh size, net length/depth, fishable area, and time restrictions). Via radio, internet, or phone, fishers hear future fishing opportunities announced, and must make decisions about which river estuary and location to fish. For most of the season, temporal ‘transfer’ penalties are assessed for fishers who choose to switch to a new river estuary. Often, the decision to switch rivers at a certain point in time has extraordinary influence to the overall success of the boat for the season. If a boat makes a poor decision and misses high yield fishing opportunities due to being in the wrong river or sitting out a transfer penalty, it could cost many thousands of dollars. Salmon managers must constantly weigh multiple objectives. Biologists try to optimize reproductive potential while avoiding over escapement (more fish swimming upriver to spawn than the estimated carrying capacity of the upstream lake) and giving fishing opportunities to the commercial and subsistence license holders (Wang, Anderson, Cunningham, Hilborn, & Link, 2019). Attaining season-wide escapement within a pre-specified range depends on the accuracy and precision in estimating how many fish are headed to each river and how many fish have been or may soon be caught. To meet these objectives, managers use multiple independent data streams during the season (Table 2).
supplanted the telephone survey, purportedly providing more accurate effort estimates across a more representative sample of anglers (National Academies of Sciences, 2017). The Fishing Effort Survey collects information on the number and locations of angler trips. These data are combined with estimated catch rates and average fish sizes derived from Access Point Angler Intercept Survey of anglers returning from fishing trips at docks. With red snapper fishing seasons continuing to shrink in recent years, all five Gulf of Mexico states petitioned to redesign the recreational angler catch reporting system at state scales, asserting they could improve accuracy and give faster in-season accounting (National Marine Fisheries Service, 2017). With recent federal certification of the statistical merits of the state survey designs, states will be able to receive monitoring funding and vie to provide an improved product. Comparing the commercial IFQ and recreational sectors, more flexibility is provided by the increased monitoring and accountability standards on the commercial side. This incentive structure mutually benefits both management and industry. For recreational anglers, yearround fishing privilege comparable to that of their commercial counterparts would likely require comparable monitoring requirements. Unsurprisingly, Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper fishing seasons are short and unpredictable, and monitoring is minimal. More broadly, the push for state-specific (but federally certified) angler catch estimates suggests that state managers acknowledge a one-size-fits-all approach may not sufficiently address differences across the region in fishing practices, socioeconomic needs, or biology. Further, knowing that federal management decisions are based on data from local sources may give stakeholders more confidence in their accuracy and appropriateness.
3.2. Monitoring program The first indices of salmon abundance come from the Port Moller Test Fishery (PMTF), a stratified gillnet survey in the salmon migration path approximately 200 km from the destined river mouths (Raborn & Link, 2018). Operated during the migration, the gillnet survey provides indication of age and size composition in addition to near real-time genetic analysis. After salmon are caught and allometric measurements are taken, tissue samples are sent to a laboratory, where in short order (< 24 h), scientists can determine the age and native rivers of the sampled fish (Eggers et al., 2011). The process effectively creates daily river- and age-specific abundance indices. Managers then track the PMTF indices to estimate the timing for salmon to traverse to their natal river mouth, where the commercial fishery operates, usually between 6 and 9 days. As more data come in, managers refine their estimated travel time and run trajectory, furthering their ability to anticipate run strength and prescribe appropriate fishing efforts.
3. Near real-time genetic and run evaluation for sockeye salmon in Alaska 3.1. Fishery overview Bristol Bay, Alaska, hosts the world's largest and most lucrative sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) fishery. Not coincidentally, the fishery exhibits some of the most sophisticated, comprehensive, and heavily enforced management regimes found globally. Each summer over a period of about eight weeks, sockeye salmon enter one of five large river systems after 1–4 years of feeding hiatus in the North Pacific Ocean (Groot & Margolis, 1991). Notably, almost all salmon will return 3
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 2 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Fisheryindependent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
Port Moller test fishery
Stratified gillnet survey operating 6–9 salmon travel days from the commercial fishery (~200 km). Collects allometric information. With scale reading and near real-time genetic component, provides daily age- and river-specific abundance indices. Aerial surveys operated by state management facilitates estimates of en-route and in-river salmon.
Daily commercial landings
Commercial catch must be landed daily. Fishers receive receipt “fish tickets” at each delivery.
Commercial test fishery
Counting towers provide river-specific estimates of upstream fish passage. Counts help refine escapement estimate.
Dealer reports
State enforcement may select a small subset of boats to fish during closed periods for a pre-determined amount of time. Provides estimate of CPUE and allows partial cost-recovery for enforcement. Dealers required to submit daily reports (sum of all “fish tickets” including estimated number of fish and species composition.
Aerial surveys
Counting towers
4. Multi-life stage monitoring of American lobster
primarily in New England and maritime Canada, with catch records dating back to the early 1800's (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). Due to a combination of factors including a favorable climate regime, fishing regulations, and decreased predation, abundance has increased exponentially since the early 1990's (Acheson & Knight, 2000). The transboundary lobster fishery is managed through the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which spans 15 states from Florida northward to Maine. Of the most productive regions of lobster fishing is the U.S. state of Maine (Fig. 1). In Maine, lobster is far and away the most valuable fishery, dominating the market with 76.2% of the total ex-vessel fisheries value in 2018 (Maine DMR, 2018). For this state alone, annual ex-vessel landings in recent years have been worth roughly 500 million USD. We will focus our attention on the monitoring efforts of Maine and how they contribute to the ASMFC stock assessment. A swift change trophic structure (Ames, 2004), coupled with abrupt climate change (Mills et al., 2013), has had and will continue to have large effects on lobster phenology and management (Mazur, Li, Chang, & Chen, 2019). American lobsters, like many other crustaceans evolved under conditions of intense predation (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). Biological attributes such as high fecundity, a large degree of parental care, and a formidable chelated exoskeleton no doubt contribute to high reproductive success. Moreover, the dramatic decline of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in the early 1990's and the relatively low diversity of the Gulf of Maine (Witman, Etter, & Smith, 2004) has likely facilitated the 3-4-fold increase in lobster during that time. Mechanistically, lobster have succeeded via mesopredator release, extensive consumption of bait (Grabowski et al., 2010), and more favorable thermal conditions over the majority of their range (Le Bris, 2018). Currently, elucidating when and if lobster population will stabilize or decrease is an important topic of study. The limited-entry commercial fishery operates largely through input controls. In all but one of Maine's seven lobster management zones, individuals may fish 800 traps year-round in state waters, and into federal waters if the captain possesses a federal permit. Lobsters are regulated via a slot limit (minimum and maximum size), along with a prohibition on the retention of egg-bearing females. Additionally, fishers are required to ‘V-notch’ the tail of egg bearing females before release to protect the spawning stock. For many subsequent molts, the female lobster will retain evidence of the notch and these individuals will remain illegal to land. Fortunately, discarding of sub- or super-legal individuals results in mortality rates close to zero (National Marine Fisheries Service, 2009). Because of the regulations and high discard survival, the fishery retains valuable spawners in the population and provides a good platform to sample catches for biological information.
4.1. Fishery overview
4.2. Monitoring program
In recent years, the most valuable fishery in the Americas has been American lobster (Homarus americanus). This species is caught
Due to the biology and behavior of lobsters, life history monitoring and assessment is a challenging task. Lobster shed their external hard
Due to the tendency of sockeye to travel in large schools and occupy the upper portion of the water column, accurate aerial surveys of both at-sea and in-river salmon abundance are conducted regularly, further aiding management decision making. Finally, salmon counting towers for the main rivers and some tributaries give another valuable line of information. River-specific catch data from the salmon buyers is reported daily to management, and overall catches and survey results are disseminated to stakeholders and the public daily via reports, public radio announcements, and website updates. In the river mouth area where commercial fishing is permitted, enforcement may select a small number of commercial boats as a ‘test fishery’ before formal openings. Selected vessels fish for a pre-determined amount of time without competition from others. Catches are reported to management, and the revenue of the test fishery is split between the fisher and the observer, the latter helping to cover management operating costs. Fishers benefit by fine tuning their fishing strategy, while management gains valuable CPUE information and cost recovery. The normal commercial fishery reports catches for every delivery made, usually 1–2 times per day. Upon delivery of catch to a tender vessel (buyer), total catch is reported from the tender to management, including estimates of total number of fish. Fishers retain a ‘fish ticket’ receipt from each transaction for personal records and verification. In parallel with the high investment in fisheries monitoring, significant resources are funneled towards enforcement. During any individual fishery opening in peak season (early July), management may use helicopters, planes, rigid hull inflatables, and undercover boats to ensure compliance (R. Boenish, personal observations). Penalties for gear infractions or fishing outside of the legal spatial or temporal bounds are severe, ranging from large fines, to loss of fishing privilege, to prosecution and boat and/or catch confiscation (State of Alaska, 2019). Funding for management and enforcement comes from a variety of sources. The PMTF receives the majority of funding from a percentage tax on selling fish and from fish processors. The value of near real-time run data and forecasts is large enough to warrant investment from fishers and the processing sector. This, in turn, helps provide management with more resources and facilitates an accurate and precise method for run-management. Together, all sectors benefit from transparency (access to data) to the extent that they may work together and co-invest in fine-scale management. It is uncommon to see such substantial industry investment in fisheries monitoring in a largely inputcontrolled fishery.
4
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Fig. 1. Location of the three U.S. fishery case studies (from top-right, clockwise): American lobster (Homarus americanus) in the Gulf of Maine, red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) in the Gulf of Mexico, and sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Table 3 Fishery-dependent and fishery-independent monitoring efforts for U.S. American lobster (Homarus americanus) in Maine, including federal waters. Fishery-independent
Description
Fishery-dependent
Description
State larvae survey pilot (2018present)
Random-stratified sampling design (surface tows) produces abundance indices of lobster larval and characterizes developmental stage.
Sea sampling survey (cooperative with industry) (1985- present)
Settlement survey- SCUBA suction and passive sampling methods (2001present) Ventless trap survey (cooperative with industry) (2006-present) Inshore trawl survey (Fall 2000present)
Settled larvae are sampled with a SCUBA diving survey where an underwater siphon is used to enumerate individuals found within specified quadrats. The SCUBA survey is complimented with passive sampling. Random-stratified ventless trap survey to monitor sublegal lobsters. Region-specific indices are used as an indicator for the future abundance of legal lobsters. Since 2000, Maine and its neighboring state, New Hampshire have jointly operated a biannual (spring and fall) inshore trawl survey. Indices inform lobster management for both juvenile and adult lobster abundance. Since 1963, federal operation of regional multispecies bottom trawl survey has provided spring and fall abundance surveys.
Federal observer trips
Volunteer lobstermen take state observers aboard for trips at no individual cost. While the observer is aboard, lobstermen and their crew haul traps as they normally would. Biological information of each lobster caught is recorded (size, sex, maturity, presence of shell disease). Most samples come from the months in which the lobster fishery is most active (May–Nov). In offshore waters, limited federal observers measure biological information (similar to sea sampling survey).
Federal regional spring/fall trawl survey (1963-present)
Commercial catch/ Dealer reports Harvester reports
Catch is sold to registered buyers, or is otherwise accounted. Dealers are required to submit weekly reports. 10% of lobstermen are randomly selected by license type to fill logbooks detailing approximate location, effort, and catch.
samples of the different stages in life history is not straightforward. However, in this region, state and federal agencies work together to conduct a mix of fishery-dependent and -independent surveys spanning the lobster's entire life history (Table 3). Fishery-independent data for the lobster population span the entirety of the species' life history. For newly hatched larvae, the Maine
parts during ecdysis (molting), and currently there is no effective aging method available. Additionally, lobsters tend to be cryptic and are known to undergo extensive ontogenetic niche shifts (Steneck & Wahle, 2013). As they grow, they become less vulnerable to predation and may choose to reside at different depths or different sediment types (Wahle & Steneck, 1992). Because of these factors, obtaining representative 5
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
include meetings between stakeholders and management to determine data needs and design systems, participation in fishery-dependent surveys, review and application of monitoring results, and other tactics. Finally, effective incentive structures are essential, and should including financial, social, and other dimensions. While in many ways discrete, these three essential elements of monitoring are not independent. For example, if industry partially funds a monitoring program, they effectively enhance their own engagement and may further their stake in monitoring design. With sufficient engagement, emerging management opportunities originate in part from the industry. For example, some of the most strict conservation measures for American lobster such as v-notching and others were industry suggestions (Daniel, Bayer, & Waltz, 1989). Recent work suggests that these measures, informed by on the water experience, enhance the resource (Acheson & Knight, 2000; Le Bris et al., 2018; Mazur et al., 2019) and will contribute to resilience in the face of climate change (Le Bris et al., 2018; Mazur et al., 2019). Similarly, the transition to limited entry and accompanying conservation measures in the Bristol Bay salmon fishery was initiated by the industry alongside management (Raborn & Link, 2018). Finally, engaging with the red snapper commercial industry about how to structure the IFQ system contributed to the effectiveness of the system and rebuilding of the stock. It is clear that industry engagement has potential to spill over into both an improved incentive structure and design scheme. The three case studies span considerable ranges of industry and management structure. For example, two of the fisheries operate - at least in part - throughout the entire year, but only commercial red snapper has any true output controls. Management for all fisheries is under the jurisdiction of similar federal or state authorities, but differences in design and strategy reflect differences in ecology, operations and fishery objectives. Notably, only the red snapper fishery grapples with a significant recreational allocation, though that might in part reflect geography and accessibility as Maine and Alaska are among the most remote and least populous states. Congruencies among social and biological outcomes are integral to the success of monitoring in all of these fisheries. All have a strong focus on understanding organism life history and ontology, and draw upon a mix of fishery-dependent and independent data. Because understanding organism life history is of interest to many parties, in most cases, information is made accessible to the public. These data help scientists understand the natural systems and aid in development of reliable stock forecasting. For the fishers and supply chain actors, reliable forecasts can aid in making business decisions and financial planning. Moreover, conducting a mixture of both fishery-dependent and -independent surveys can help scientists develop new ideas and further their conceptual understanding of the social-ecological system. Cooperative design and implementation of surveys, especially using fishing vessels, provides invaluable opportunities for positive interactions between industry and science (NRC, 2003). Effective incorporation of incentives can enhance compliance and maintained cooperation. We identified three major types of incentives that can be incorporated into fishery monitoring: financial, social, and joint funding. Financial benefits or consequences include penalties for non-compliance, access to data that enable more confident market decisions, and improving management to allow increased fishing opportunities. Social incentives can carry similar weight to financial incentives, and often focus on stakeholder trust in the science. For example, Runnebaum et al. (2018) found that stakeholders find science more credible when they understand the methods. Ways to foster this trust include industry participation in monitoring design, implementation, and funding. Shared funding responsibilities can be especially important, but may not be popular and therefore may not be implemented by policymakers without benefits being clearly perceived. However, if implemented effectively, co-investment in monitoring can provide an additional platform for communication between industry, scientists, and management, with industry having an increased stake in
Department of Marine Resources (DMR) has piloted a small mesh larval sampling survey since 2018 in four historic sites to produce fisheryindependent lobster larvae abundance indices. Recently settled lobsters or ‘young of year’ are sampled via a SCUBA diving survey. Researchers use an underwater siphon to enumerate settled lobsters residing within sampled quadrats coast-wide, which results in spatially-explicit abundance indices. Consistent suction sampling time series date back to 2001. Next, region-specific indices of life history stages from juvenile through adult are obtained from a random-stratified ventless trap survey. Unlike commercial lobster traps, which are equipped with escape vents to allow the release of juveniles, this survey operates standardized traps without vents. As expected, these traps catch a high proportion of juvenile lobsters, indices for which can be used to predict the future abundance of legal lobsters. The final fishery-independent data are from state and federal trawl surveys. Since 1963, the U.S. federal government has operated a larger-scale regional spring and fall bottom trawl survey. Due to commercial trap congestion, the large trawl is generally unable to operate in Maine nearshore waters. To address this gap, Maine and its neighboring state of New Hampshire have jointly operated a smaller scale fishery-independent inshore trawl survey in the spring and fall to generate complementary data stream on both juvenile and adult abundance. In addition to the fisheries-independent monitoring programs, important data also come from the Maine Lobster Sea Sampling program. Volunteer lobstermen take state observers aboard day trips at no individual cost, and observers collect data as lobstermen and their crew haul traps as they normally would. Depending on the license held by the lobsterman, sampling may span both state and federal waters. Biological information from each lobster caught is recorded (size, sex, maturity, presence of V-notch or shell disease). While the sea sampling program operates year-round, most samples come from the months in which the lobster fishery is most active. Additionally, for federal permit holders, federal observers operate a similar, but smaller scale, obligatory fishery-dependent data collection survey in both state and federal waters. The amount of federal observer coverage is based on the availability of resources and need to monitor bycatch rates of groundfish, especially Atlantic cod and Cusk, Brosme brosme. In the further offshore waters, trips may last for one up to a few days. For finer-scale spatial information, port-based dealer report data are collected by state and federal managers accounting for 100% of transactions, and 10% of lobstermen are randomly selected by license type to regularly report spatial and CPUE data. While dealers are required to report only landings and price, lobstermen reports are more detailed. Their logbooks include spatial data, catch, and the number of traps hauled. Not unlike most regions in the United States, the funding for lobster monitoring comes from outside of industry. However, unlike the other fisheries considered herein, there are no financial or other direct benefits to participants tied to direct monitoring outcomes (e.g., longer fishing season). Cooperation by lobstermen in the monitoring program is likely due to recognition that the overall performance of the management program is positive, supported by incentives and trust ingrained in the culture and traditions of the fishery (Acheson, 1988). 5. Discussion Our review of the monitoring programs in these case study fisheries highlights what we argue are three major deterministic categories of monitoring success (Table 4). First of course is the institutional and technical design of a program. This includes jurisdictional congruency, or at least working relationships between bodies. In the cases presented, continually evolving jurisdictional working relationships are essential to a robust monitoring design. We believe this to be true regardless of scale (local, state, federal, and international). Second, initial and continued engagement with industry is crucial to not only furthering monitoring science, but to build and continue the necessary relationships between resources users and management. Engagement can 6
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
Table 4 Critical attributes of monitoring systems for three U.S fisheries: American lobster, sockeye salmon, and red snapper. Monitoring designs are divided into three sections: Design, Engagement, and Incentive structures (blue, green, and purple, respectively). An “X” denotes a fishery satisfies a monitoring metric. Note, at the time of writing this manuscript, the red snapper fishery state pilots are not all federally certified, hence the absence of an “X”. We anticipate an eventual change..
in improved survey coverage and data resolution. What should be done about the other end of the incentive spectrum? Conversely, monitoring incentives should penalize bad actors, such as those who misrepresent or hide behavior that would introduce greater restrictions. Managers must strive to find a balance between creating penalties sufficient to broadly encourage compliance, but doing so while building stakeholder buy-in. Additionally, with broad stakeholder buy-in for addressing critical issues, avoiding new problems, such species becoming protected or endangered, may result in lower burdens for both management and stakeholders.
the process. An important opportunity for reducing costs and improving data streams is through new and efficient monitoring technologies. Undoubtedly, fisheries monitoring is in a transition from paper logbooks, intermittent dockside sampling, and other low-tech approaches that are subject to errors, inconsistency, and limited coverage, to a new generation of digital logbooks, traceability technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence to estimate catch composition and volume, and satellite tracking, among others. In some instances, increased oversight through technological tools is generating privacy and cost concerns, but elsewhere is being met with excitement about costeffectiveness, reduced risks to both fishers and observers, and other benefits. We expect that the trend toward implementation of technological solutions will continue, and eventually will reduce overall monitoring costs while improving scientific and management performance. Although improving monitoring can increase fishing opportunities, it also has potential to reduce fishing opportunities in certain circumstances. For example, with limited monitoring, the full extent of fishery practices such as discarding might be underestimated, especially if the discarded species is rare. In such cases, industry might rightly suspect that increased monitoring would result in new restrictions to conserve the bycatch species. This outcome is unfortunate, particularly in the case where industry is a monitoring proponent. In some respects, industry may feel ‘punished’ for making monitoring commitments in good faith. However, eventually the ecological or policy implications of depletion that had gone unobserved will more often than not impose severe socio-economic impacts on the fishery. Therefore, early detection and response to these issues enabled by effective monitoring have both long- and shrt-term benefits. For incentives to be successful, the general model should be to reward monitoring investments conducted in good faith. As was seen in the red snapper commercial sector, introduction of multiple enhanced monitoring techniques enables increased fishing privilege (near yearround fishing opportunity, flexibility for fishers to harness markets to increase profits), and because the rebuilding is so far successful (Reference biomass has increased 3.3-fold from 2000 to 2016) (SEDAR, 2018), annual quotas have been increasing. In this example, the bundling of fishing privileges with enhanced monitoring responsibilities created positive incentives for compliance, ultimately resulting
6. Conclusions Examining similarities and differences in fisheries monitoring across case studies provides an opportunity to identify elements of success or failure for a monitoring scheme. Monitoring is inherently an interdisciplinary endeavor, which involves deep thinking and continuous work from a variety of actors. We have drawn from examples of fisheries targeting species with different life histories, exploitation histories, and management structure, but acknowledge that these do not span the complete spectrum of biological and management contexts. For example, the three case study fisheries are well-developed with high economic value and are relatively data-rich by global standards. Of course, the exception to these attributes within our case studies serves to illustrate that a mix fishery-dependent and -independent data can promote success. The recreational red snapper is the most dysfunctional and contentious among our examples, and also the one with the sparsest monitoring, most deteriorated political relationships, and weakest incentives. Ideally, the design, engagement strategy, and incentive structure are laid out early in the process of fishery exploitation, but unfortunately this is rarely the case. Further, changes in management, particularly reductions in fishing opportunities, are rarely well-received. Management reforms therefore almost inherently will face pressures to maintain the status quo, and fisheries management must grapple with stabilizing social systems that depend on biological systems unlikely ever to be at equilibrium. With increasing environmental threats and prospects of shifting definitions of ‘normal’, the need for continual conversation and feedback between industry and management cannot be overstated, nor can the importance of timely and granular data on 7
Aquaculture and Fisheries xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
R. Boenish, et al.
social, economic, and environmental conditions. Despite the difficulties, clear successes are possible through continued work on management design, consistent and earnest engagement, and consideration of incentives. The two-way street is volatile at times, but is crucial for successful monitoring and long-term fishery success.
evaluate the robustness of current management regulations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2018-0122 (in press). Mills, K., Pershing, A., Brown, C., Chen, Y., Chiang, F.-S., Holland, D., et al. (2013). Fisheries management in a changing climate: Lessons from the 2012 ocean heat wave in the Northwest Atlantic. Oceanography, 26. https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog. 2013.27. Myers, R. A., Hutchings, J. A., & Barrowman, N. J. (1997). WHY do FISH stocks collapse? The example OF cod IN Atlantic Canada. Ecological Applications, 7, 91–106. https:// doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761 (1997)007[0091:WDFSCT]2.0.CO;2. National Academies of Sciences (2017). Review of the marine recreational information program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Marine Fisheries Service (2009). Final environmental assessment final regulatory impact review and final regulatory flexibility analysis of mandatory federal lobster dealer reporting and broodstock protection measures. Silver Springs, MD: NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service (2017). Certification of marine recreational information program (MRIP) fishing survey method for LA Creel. MD: Silver Springs. NOAA Southeast Regional Office (2019). Historical Overview (1800s-present): How has the red snapper fishery changed over time? . NRC (2003). Cooperative research in the national marine fisheries Service. Washington, D.C: National Academies Presshttps://doi.org/10.17226/10836. Ocean Conservancy et al. Ross, v. (2017). Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133. Petitgas, P. (2001). Geostatistics BlackwellScience,Ltd in fisheries survey design and stock assessment: Models, variances and applications. Fish and Fisheries, 19. Pinsky, M. L., Worm, B., Fogarty, M. J., Sarmiento, J. L., & Levin, S. A. (2013). Marine taxa track local climate velocities. Science, 341, 1239–1242. https://doi.org/10. 1126/science.1239352. Quinn, T. P., & Dittman, A. H. (1990). Pacific salmon mirgrations and homing: Mechanisms and adaptive significance. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 5, 174–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(90)90205-R. Raborn, S. W., & Link, M. R. (2018). Annual report for the 2018 port Moller test fisheryBristol Bay Fisheries Collaborative, Dillingham, AK: Bristol Bay Science and Research Institute. Runnebaum, J. M., Maxwell, E. A., Stoll, J. S., Pianka, K. E., & Oppenheim, N. G. (2018). Communication, relationships, and relatability influence stakeholder perceptions of credible science. Fisherieshttps://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10214. SEDAR (2018). Stock assessment report Gulf of Mexico red snapper (No. 52)North Charleston, SC: SEDAR. State of Alaska (2019). Alaska State Statute. 16.05.190. Steneck, R. S., & Wahle, R. A. (2013). American lobster dynamics in a brave new ocean. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 70, 1612–1624. https://doi.org/10. 1139/cjfas-2013-0094. Stokesbury, K. D. E., Cadrin, S. X., Calabrese, N., Keiley, E., Lowery, T. M., Rothschild, B. J., et al. (2017). Towards an improved system for sampling new England groundfish using video technology. Fisheries, 42, 432–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415. 2017.1342630. U.S.. (2009). Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. 16 U.S.C. ch.38 § 1801 et seq. . Wahle, R. A., & Steneck, R. S. (1992). Habitat restrictions in early benthic life: Experiments on habitat selection and in situ predation with the American lobster. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 157, 91–114. https://doi.org/10. 1016/0022-0981(92)90077-N. Wang, J. Y.-L., Anderson, C. M., Cunningham, C. J., Hilborn, R., & Link, M. R. (2019). Does more fish mean more money? Evaluating alternative escapement goals in the Bristol Bay salmon fishery. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 76, 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2017-0336. Wilbur, H. M. (1980). Complex life cycles. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11, 67–93. Witman, J. D., Etter, R. J., & Smith, F. (2004). The relationship between regional and local species diversity in marine benthic communities: A global perspective. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101, 15664–15669. https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.0404300101.
Acknowledgements We thank Andrew Goode, Burton Shank, Glenn Chamberlain, and Robert Watts for helpful comments and clarifications on state and federal American lobster monitoring programs. We further thank Jessica Stephen for helpful comments on Gulf of Mexico red snapper monitoring programs. This research was supported through the High Meadows Foundation, Kravis Scientific Research Fund. The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Abbott, J. K., & Willard, D. (2017). Rights based management for recreational for-hire fisheries: Evidence from a policy trial. Fisheries Research, 196, 106–116. Acheson, J. M. (1988). The lobster gangs of Maine (1st ed.). Durham, NH: University Press of New England. Acheson, J. M., & Knight, J. (2000). Distribution fights, coordination games, and lobster management. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 42, 209–238. Daniel, P. C., Bayer, R. C., & Waltz, C. (1989). Egg production of V-notched American lobsters (Homarus americanus) along coastal Maine. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 9, 77. https://doi.org/10.2307/1548449. Dunn, D. C., Jablonicky, C., Crespo, G. O., McCauley, D. J., Kroodsma, D. A., Boerder, K., et al. (2018). Empowering high seas governance with satellite vessel tracking data. Fish and Fisheries, 19, 729–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12285. Eggers, D. M., Witteveen, M. J., Baker, T. T., Evenson, D. F., Berger, J. M., Hoyt, H. A., et al. (2011). Results from sampling the 2006-2009 commercial and subsistence fisheries int he Western Alaska Salmon Stock Identification Project. Alaska Department of Fish and Game Special Publications No. 10–11. Farmer, N. A., Malinowski, R. P., McGovern, M. F., & Rubec, P. J. (2016). Stock complexes for fisheries management in the gulf of Mexico. Mar. Coast. Fish. 8, 177–201. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19425120.2015.1024359. Gaines, S. D., Costello, C., Owashi, B., Mangin, T., Bone, J., Molinos, J. G., et al. (2018). Improved fisheries management could offset many negative effects of climate change. Sci. Adv. 9. Grabowski, J. H., Clesceri, E. J., Baukus, A. J., Gaudette, J., Weber, M., & Yund, P. O. (2010). Use of herring bait to farm lobsters in the gulf of Maine. PLoS One, 5, e10188. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010188. Groot, C., & Margolis, L. (1991). Pacific salmon life histories: Life history of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Vancouver: University of Birttish Columbia Press. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248. https://doi. org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243. Le Bris, A., Mills, K. E., Wahle, R. A., Chen, Y., Alexander, M. A., Allyn, A. J., et al. (2018). Climate vulnerability and resilience in the most valuable North American fishery. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 1831–1836. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.1711122115. Linton, B. (2012). Shrimp fishery bycatch estimates for Gulf of Mexico red snapper, 19722011 (No. SEDAR31-DW30). Miami, FL: NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Maine, D. M. R. (2018). Maine commercial landings. ME, USA: Maine Department of Marine Resources. Mazur, M., Li, B., Chang, J. H., & Chen, Y. (2019). Using an Individual-based model to simulate the gulf of Maine American Lobster (Homarus americanus) fishery and
8