Search

Recreational fishing is the fastest growing sector in industrialized nations and can have substantial impacts on marine fish populations and ecosystems. Commercial objectives are typically characterized by maximizing yield and fishery stability whereas recreational anglers generally prefer sustained access to fishing and the availability of larger fish. Achieving these objectives while balancing tradeoffs between recreational and commercial fishing is essential to effective recreational and mixed-use fisheries management. Balancing multiple sector objectives is of particular concern in the southeast United States (US), where recreational fishing is the dominant source of mortality for marine fish stocks. We developed and applied a size-structured management strategy evaluation (MSE) tool, individually, to two stocks in southeast US Atlantic waters, black sea bass (Centropristis striata), a sedentary reef fish in overfished condition, and cobia (Rachycentron canadum), a migratory coastal pelagic fish, to evaluate the performance and tradeoffs of mixed management procedures against a variety of objectives. Several recreational and commercial objectives were aligned: fishers sought to conserve the stock and maximize catch, which simplified the evaluation of tradeoffs. We tested management procedures over alternate states of recruitment for black sea bass, and natural mortality for cobia. Management procedures that allowed harvest for black sea bass resulted in or risked an overfished status if the current weak recruitment regime continues, but could rebuild with no fishing regardless of recruitment state. Although results were sensitive to uncertainty in recruitment, no management procedures could achieve historic landings for either sector, and only management procedures that reduced effort consistently resulted in a reduced number of dead discards. No management procedures resulted in an overfished status for cobia. Management procedures for cobia generally achieved objectives and were robust to uncertainty in natural mortality. In both case studies, tradeoffs occurred between maximizing catch and season length and maintaining a stronger size structure in the population. This study resulted in a flexible MSE tool with strong potential utility for scoping management procedures that explicitly consider recreational fishing objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public trust in natural resources agencies is critical for successful resource management and can facilitate an environment of management innovation and experimentation. However, building public trust in natural resources management is often challenging, particularly in resource management systems where people may receive information from a variety of different sources. We used a mail survey to analyze the relationship between affinitive trust (a measure of perceived shared values), information source use, and overall support for management in marine fisheries in the United States. The results of our mixed linear model showed that higher levels of affinitive trust and more use of official sources were most strongly associated with higher levels of support for management. The use of website sources (e.g., fishing websites and blogs), third-party sources (e.g., fishing organizations, advocacy groups, tv, and bait or tackle shops), older age, and higher levels of income were most associated with lower levels of support. The results imply that engendering higher levels of affinitive trust by promoting institutional values may lead to higher support for management. • Anglers generally trusted resource management agencies to manage fisheries • Management agencies that engender higher levels of affinitive trust are more likely to be trusted to effectively manage resources. • Taking steps to promote institutional values that are shared with the public may help to build affinitive trust and support for management. • Official agency communications in the form of websites, regulations booklets, etc. are important sources of trusted information, but are only one of many sources that anglers might use for fishery information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1. Threat listing of exploited marine species has been controversial because of the scientific uncertainty of extinction risk as well as the social, economic and political costs of management procedures that may be triggered by designation of species as threatened. 2. We applied three sets of threat criteria to 76 stocks (populations) of 21 exploited marine fish and invertebrate species. Two criteria sets were based on decline rates: World Conservation Union (IUCN A1) and the American Fisheries Society (AFS). The third set of criteria, based on population viability (IUCN E), was assessed using non-parametric simulation and two diffusion approximation methods. 3. We compared extinction risk outcomes (threatened or not) against the exploitation status of each stock as reported in fish stock assessments (inside or outside safe biological limits). For each combination of threat and exploitation we assessed the rate of hits, misses and false alarms. 4. Our analyses suggest that decline rate criteria provide risk categorizations consistent with population viability analyses when applied to exploited marine stocks. Nearly a quarter of the fish and invertebrate populations ( n = 18) considered met one or more of the threat criteria. 5. None of the threat metrics produced false alarms, where sustainably exploited stocks were categorized as threatened. The quantitative IUCN E metrics produced higher hit rates than the decline rate metrics (IUCN A1 and AFS) and all of the metrics produced similar miss rates. However, the IUCN E methods could be applied to fewer stocks (12–14) compared with IUCN A1 decline rate and AFS criteria, both of which could be applied all 76 stocks. 6. Synthesis and applications. Threat criteria provide warnings of population collapse that are consistent with those provided in fisheries stock assessments. Our results suggest that scientists with different backgrounds and objectives should usually be able to agree on the stocks for which the most urgent management action is needed. Moreover, IUCN A1 decline rate metrics may provide useful indicators of population status when the information needed for full fisheries stock assessment is not available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]