Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Management Act (management + act)
Selected AbstractsA new role for MSY in single-species and ecosystem approaches to fisheries stock assessment and managementFISH AND FISHERIES, Issue 1 2001In 1977, Peter Larkin published his now-famous paper, ,An epitaph for the concept of maximum sustained yield'. Larkin criticized the concept of single-species maximum sustained yield (MSY) for many reasons, including the possibility that it may not guard against recruitment failure, and the impossibility of maximising sustainable yields for all species simultaneously. However, in recent years, there has been a fundamental change in the perception of the fishing mortality associated with MSY (FMSY) as a limit to be avoided rather than a target that can routinely be exceeded. The concept of FMSY as a limit is embodied in several United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) agreements and guidelines, and has now been incorporated into the US Magnuson,Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. As a result, the United States now requires the development of overfishing definitions based on biological reference points that treat the FMSY as a limit reference point and must also define a lower limit on biomass below which rebuilding plans with strict time horizons must be developed. This represents a major paradigm shift from the previously mandated (but often unachieved) objective to simply maintain fishing mortalities at levels below those associated with recruitment overfishing. In many cases, it requires substantial reductions in current fishing mortality levels. Therefore, the necessity of the new paradigm is continually questioned. This paper draws on examples from several fisheries, but specifically focuses on the recent US experience illustrating the practical difficulties of reducing fishing mortality to levels below those corresponding to MSY. However, several studies suggest that even more substantial reductions in fishing mortality may be necessary if ecosystem considerations, such as multispecies interactions, maintenance of biodiversity and genetic diversity, and reduction of bycatch and waste, are taken into account. The pros and cons of moving beyond single-species assessment and management are discussed. A US plan for improving stock assessments indicates that even a ,basic' objective such as ,adequate baseline monitoring of all managed species' may be extremely costly. Thus, the suggestion of Larkin (1983, 1997) that the costs of research and management should not exceed 10,20% of the landed value of the catch may preclude comprehensive ecosystem management. More importantly, neither single-species nor ecosystem-based fisheries management is likely to improve appreciably unless levels of fishing capacity are aligned with resource productivity, as is currently being promoted by FAO and several individual nations. [source] Managing non-target, data-poor species using catch limits: lessons from the Alaskan groundfish fisheryFISHERIES MANAGEMENT & ECOLOGY, Issue 4 2010R. F. REUTER Abstract, The 2006 reauthorisation of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act requires annual catch limits for all target and non-target species within federally managed fisheries in the United States. In Alaska, both target and non-target species in the Alaska groundfish fisheries have been managed using catch limits since the early 1990s. Non-target species that are caught incidentally in a fishery require monitoring to ensure that the population is not negatively impacted by commercial fishing. Resource assessment scientists have been challenged with obtaining sufficient data to recommend an acceptable catch level for management of these species. This paper reviews three case studies where a catch limit is determined for non-target species when certain data are limited: (1) varying levels of biomass and catch data for all species within a species group or complex; (2) adequate catch data but no biomass data; (3) emerging target fishery of data-poor species, plus an example of how a complex of ecosystem component species is managed. [source] ESTABLISHING WATERSHED MANAGEMENT IN LAW: NEW ZEALAND'S EXPERIENCE,JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, Issue 4 2001Eric Pyle ABSTRACT: New Zealand is one of the first countries in the world to enshrine the concept of watershed management in law, through institutional arrangements and the Resource Management Act of 1991-a law constructed on a watershed management legacy begun in 1941. This paper outlines the development of New Zealand's Resource Management Act (as it applies to water management) and the lessons that have been learned in its implementation. [source] Influencing Fisheries Management: Multitasking for Maximum EffectivenessANNALS OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL PRACTICE, Issue 1 2007John R. Maiolo From the very first drafts of what later became the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the subsequent creation of regional and state counterparts, social science was supposed to play more than a perfunctory role in the nation's fishery management process. But our involvement as social scientists has not been a cakewalk and, although growing, our influence often has been limited at best. This article discusses how we can impact the process by using different styles of involvement and different research methods. Different styles of involvement include teaching, with an emphasis on recruitment of students and colleagues into the effort, along with multidisciplinary team research. This article illustrates how we must be willing to gather information on an opportunistic basis rather than be wedded to any one type of data gathering and analytic strategy as we move from one project to another. We social scientists can be most effective if we are willing to be persistent, flexible but focused, and able to employ a variety of complementary tactics. Along with this we need to find ways to participate in the management process from the inside. We must also establish our work in the fisheries management process as legitimate within our own respective professions. Finally, this article suggests that such a multifaceted strategy can be effective in other areas of policy concern. [source] | ||||||||||