Drivers and rates of stock assessments in the United States

Fisheries management is most effective when based on scientific estimates of sustainable fishing rates. While some simple approaches allow estimation of harvest limits, more data-intensive stock assessments are generally required to evaluate the stock’s biomass and fishing rates relative to sustainable levels. Here we evaluate how stock characteristics relate to the rate of new assessments in the United States. Using a statistical model based on time-to-event analysis and 569 coastal marine fish and invertebrate stocks landed in commercial fisheries, we quantify the impact of region, habitat, life-history, and economic factors on the annual probability of being assessed. Although the majority of landings come from assessed stocks in all regions, less than half of the regionally-landed species currently have been assessed. As expected, our time-to-event model identified landed tonnage and ex-vessel price as the dominant factors determining increased rates of new assessments. However, we also found that after controlling for landings and price, there has been a consistent bias towards assessing larger-bodied species. A number of vulnerable groups such as rockfishes (Scorpaeniformes) and groundsharks (Carcharhiniformes) have a relatively high annual probability of being assessed after controlling for their relatively small tonnage and low price. Due to relatively low landed tonnage and price of species that are currently unassessed, our model suggests that the number of assessed stocks will increase more slowly in future decades.

[1]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Marine fisheries as ecological experiments , 2012, Theoretical Ecology.

[2]  David C. Smith,et al.  From low- to high-value fisheries: Is it possible to quantify the trade-off between management cost, risk and catch? , 2013 .

[3]  Tim D. Smith Scaling Fisheries: The Science of Measuring the Effects of Fishing, 1855-1955 , 1994, Polar Record.

[4]  Jim Berkson,et al.  Current methods for setting catch limits for data-limited fish stocks in the United States , 2015 .

[5]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[6]  J. Thorson,et al.  The determination of data-poor catch limits in the United States: is there a better way? , 2015 .

[7]  Steven J. D. Martell,et al.  Can catch share fisheries better track management targets , 2012 .

[8]  Population trends of bycatch species reflect improving status of target species , 2018 .

[9]  G. Pierce,et al.  Global proliferation of cephalopods , 2016, Current Biology.

[10]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Probability of stochastic depletion: an easily interpreted diagnostic for stock assessment modelling and fisheries management , 2014, ICES Journal of Marine Science.

[11]  Ransom A. Myers,et al.  Maximum reproductive rate of fish at low population sizes , 1999 .

[12]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Effects of Management Tactics on Meeting Conservation Objectives for Western North American Groundfish Fisheries , 2013, PloS one.

[13]  Flaxen D. L. Conway,et al.  socioeconomic Lessons Learned from the response to the Federally-Declared West Coast Groundfish Disaster , 2008 .

[14]  Alec D. MacCall,et al.  Depletion-Based Stock Reduction Analysis: A catch-based method for determining sustainable yields for data-poor fish stocks , 2011 .

[15]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Status and Solutions for the World’s Unassessed Fisheries , 2012, Science.

[16]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models , 2006 .

[17]  Naomi R. Wray,et al.  Assessment of Response to Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Bipolar Disorder: A Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) Report , 2013, PloS one.

[18]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Rebuilding Global Fisheries , 2009, Science.

[19]  Richard D. Methot,et al.  A review of stock assessment packages in the United States , 2016 .

[20]  André E. Punt,et al.  Performance of a fisheries catch-at-age model (Stock Synthesis) in data-limited situations , 2011 .

[21]  P C Wainwright,et al.  rfishbase: exploring, manipulating and visualizing FishBase data from R. , 2012, Journal of fish biology.

[22]  Jameal F. Samhouri,et al.  Giants' shoulders 15 years later: lessons, challenges and guidelines in fisheries meta‐analysis , 2015 .

[23]  M. Wilberg,et al.  An Evaluation of Harvest Control Rules for Data-Poor Fisheries , 2013 .

[24]  Jason E. Waller,et al.  Division , 2018, Bad Arguments.

[25]  Alec D. MacCall,et al.  Depletion-corrected average catch: a simple formula for estimating sustainable yields in data-poor situations , 2009 .

[26]  R. Methot,et al.  Implementing a science-based system for preventing overfishing and guiding sustainable fisheries in the United States , 2014 .

[27]  André E. Punt,et al.  Evaluating methods for setting catch limits in data-limited fisheries , 2014 .

[28]  Sarah Valenti,et al.  Extinction risk and conservation of the world’s sharks and rays , 2013, eLife.

[29]  R. Watson,et al.  Global fishery development patterns are driven by profit but not trophic level , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[30]  I. J. Stewart,et al.  Stock Assessment of Pacific Hake, Merluccius productus, (a.k.a. Whiting) in U.S. and Canadian Waters in 2010 , 2010 .

[31]  Cóilín Minto,et al.  Trends in the abundance of marine fishes , 2010 .

[32]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Fisheries management impacts on target species status , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  U. H. Thygesen,et al.  Estimating uncertainty of data limited stock assessments , 2017 .

[34]  R. Methot Prioritizing fish stock assessments , 2015 .

[35]  Rainer Froese,et al.  FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. , 2014 .

[36]  André E. Punt,et al.  Model performance for the determination of appropriate harvest levels in the case of data-poor stocks , 2011 .

[37]  Ian J. Stewart,et al.  Defining Trade‐Offs among Conservation, Profitability, and Food Security in the California Current Bottom‐Trawl Fishery , 2012, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.