Shifting gears: assessing collateral impacts of fishing methods in US waters

Problems with fisheries are usually associated with overfishing; in other words, with the deployment of “too many” fishing gears. However, overfishing is not the only problem. Collateral impacts of fishing methods on incidental take (bycatch) and on habitats are also cause for concern. Assessing collateral impacts, through integrating the knowledge of a wide range of fisheries stakeholders, is an important element of ecosystem management, especially when consensual results are obtained. This can be demonstrated using the “damage schedule approach” to elicit judgments from fishers, scientists, and managers on the severity of fishing gear impacts on marine ecosystems. The consistent ranking of fishing gears obtained from various respondents can serve as a basis for formulating fisheries policies that will minimize ecosystem impacts. Such policies include a shift to less damaging gears and establishing closed areas to limit collateral impacts.

[1]  Jeremy S. Collie,et al.  National research council study on the effects of trawling and dredging on seafloor habitat , 2005 .

[2]  M. Hall On bycatches , 2004, Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries.

[3]  B. Worm,et al.  Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities , 2003, Nature.

[4]  T. Okey Membership of the eight Regional Fishery Management Councils in the United States: are special interests over-represented? , 2003 .

[5]  T. Pitcher,et al.  Towards sustainability in world fisheries , 2002, Nature.

[6]  R. Chuenpagdee,et al.  Community Perspectives Toward a Marine Reserve: A Case Study of San Felipe, Yucatán, México , 2002 .

[7]  J. Parrish,et al.  Reducing Seabird Bycatch in Longline Fisheries by Means of Bird-Scaring Lines and Underwater Setting , 2002 .

[8]  J. Geibel,et al.  Results of California Department of Fish and Game spot prawn trawl and trap fisheries bycatch observer program 2000-2001 , 2002 .

[9]  Pieter A. Folkens,et al.  Guide to marine mammals of the world , 2002 .

[10]  J. Knetsch,et al.  Coastal Management Using Public Judgments, Importance Scales, and Predetermined Schedule , 2001 .

[11]  T. Brown,et al.  Environmental Damage Schedules: Community Judgments of Importance and Assessments of Losses , 2001, Land Economics.

[12]  Christopher W. Glass,et al.  CONSERVATION OF FISH STOCKS THROUGH BYCATCH REDUCTION: A REVIEW , 2000 .

[13]  Elliott A. Norse,et al.  Disturbance of the Seabed by Mobile Fishing Gear: A Comparison to Forest Clearcutting , 1998 .

[14]  D. Pauly,et al.  Fishing down marine food webs , 1998, Science.

[15]  T. Brown,et al.  Economic Valuation by the Method of Paired Comparison, with Emphasis on Evaluation of the Transitivity Axiom , 1998 .

[16]  Paul J. B. Hart,et al.  Reinventing Fisheries Management , 1998, Fish & Fisheries Series.

[17]  T. Pitcher,et al.  Rebuilding ecosystems, not sustainability, as the proper goal of fishery management , 1998 .

[18]  J. Collie,et al.  Effects of bottom fishing on the benthic megafauna of Georges Bank , 1997 .

[19]  Robert J. Hofman,et al.  Environmental effects of marine fishing , 1995 .

[20]  T. F. Weaver,et al.  Evaluating Impacts from Noxious Facilities: Including Public Preferences in Current Siting Mechanisms , 1993 .

[21]  P. Moran On the method of paired comparisons. , 1947, Biometrika.

[22]  J. WISHART,et al.  Statistical Tables , 2021, Nature.