No abstract

Concern about the impact of fishing on ecosystems and fisheries production is increasing (1, 2). Strategies to reduce these impacts while addressing the growing need for food security (3) include increasing selectivity (1, 2): capturing species, sexes, and sizes in proportions that differ from their occurrence in the ecosystem. Increasing evidence suggests that more selective fishing neither maximizes production nor minimizes impacts (4-7). Balanced harvesting would more effectively mitigate adverse ecological effects of fishing while supporting sustainable fisheries. This strategy, which challenges present management paradigms, distributes a moderate mortality from fishing across the widest possible range of species, stocks, and sizes in an ecosystem, in proportion to their natural productivity (8), so that the relative size and species composition is maintained.

Globally, many fish species are overexploited, and many stocks have collapsed. This crisis, along with increasing concerns over flow-on effects on ecosystems, has caused a reevaluation of traditional fisheries management practices, and a new ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) paradigm has emerged. As part of this approach, selective fishing is widely encouraged in the belief that nonselective fishing has many adverse impacts. In particular, incidental bycatch is seen as wasteful and a negative feature of fishing, and methods to reduce bycatch are implemented in many fisheries. However, recent advances in fishery science and ecology suggest that a selective approach may also result in undesirable impacts both to fisheries and marine ecosystems. Selective fishing applies one or more of the "6-S" selections: species, stock, size, sex, season, and space. However, selective fishing alters biodiversity, which in turn changes ecosystem functioning and may affect fisheries production, hindering rather than helping achieve the goals of EBFM. We argue here that a "balanced exploitation" approach might alleviate many of the ecological effects of fishing by avoiding intensive removal of particular components of the ecosystem, while still supporting sustainable fisheries. This concept may require reducing exploitation rates on certain target species or groups to protect vulnerable components of the ecosystem. Benefits to society could be maintained or even increased because a greater proportion of the entire suite of harvested species is used.balanced exploitation | biodiversity | sustainability | bycatch | 6-S selection

The rule of thumb that fishing mortality to achieve maximum sustainable yield (FMSY) equals natural mortality (M) has been both criticised and supported by theoretical arguments. However, the relationship has been rarely investigated using empirical data. We carried out a meta-analysis on 245 fish species worldwide and linked three types of reference points (FBRP: FMSY, Fproxy, and F0.5r) to M and other life history parameters (LHP). We used Bayesian hierarchical errors-in-variables models to investigate the relationships and included the effect of taxonomic class and order. We compared various models and found that natural mortality is the most important LHP affecting FBRP. Other covariates, such as von Bertalanffy growth coefficient, asymptotic length, maximum age, and habitat types, add little to the relationship, partially because of correlation and large measurement and process errors. The best model results in FMSY = 0.87M (standard deviation (SD) = 0.05) for teleosts and FMSY = 0.41M (SD = 0.09) for chondrichthyans. Fproxy based on per-recruit analysis is about 15% smaller than FMSY. Results could be used to estimate FBRP from LHP in data-poor situations.

No abstract

No abstract

Punt, A. E., Deng, R. A., Dichmont, C. M., Kompas, T., Venables, W. N., Zhou, S., Pascoe, S., Hutton, T., Kenyon, R., van der Velde, T., and Kienzle, M. 2010. Integrating size-structured assessment and bioeconomic management advice in Australia's northern prawn fishery. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 67: 1785–1801. Three species in Australia's northern prawn fishery (Penaeus semisulcatus, P. esculentus, and Metapenaeus endeavouri) are assessed using a size-structured population model that operates on a weekly time-step. The parameters of this multispecies population model are estimated using data on catches, catch rates, length frequency data from surveys and the fishery, and tag release–recapture data. The model allows for the technical interaction among the three species. The results from the multispecies stock assessment are used to calculate the time-series of catches and levels of fishing effort that maximize net present value. The bioeconomic model takes into account costs which are proportional to catches and those which are proportional to fishing effort, as well as fixed costs. The sensitivity of the results is examined by changing the assumptions regarding the values for the economic parameters of the bioeconomic model as well as those on which the assessment are based. The results suggest that fishing effort needs to be reduced in the short term to achieve economic goals, although most stocks are estimated currently to be above the stock size corresponding to maximum sustainable yield. Short-term catches and effort levels are sensitive to model assumptions, and in particular, to trends in prices and costs.

Balanced harvest has been proposed to reduce fishing impact on ecosystems while simultaneously maintaining or even increasing fishery yield. The concept has attracted broad interest, but also received criticisms. In this paper, we examine the theory, modelling studies, empirical evidence, the legal and policy frameworks, and management implications of balanced harvest. The examination reveals unresolved issues and challenges from both scientific and management perspectives. We summarize current knowledge and address common questions relevant to the idea. Major conclusions include: balanced harvest can be expressed in several ways and implemented on multiple levels, and with different approaches e.g. métier based management; it explicitly bridges fisheries and conservation goals in accordance with international legal and policy frameworks; modelling studies and limited empirical evidence reveal that balanced harvest can reduce fishing impact on ecosystem structure and increase the aggregate yield; the S. Zhou (&) CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Rev Fish Biol Fisheries (2019) 29:711-733 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-019-09568-w( 0123456789().,-volV) (0123456789().,-volV) extent of balanced harvest is not purely a scientific question, but also a legal and social choice; a transition to balanced harvest may incur short-term economic costs, while in the long-term, economic results will vary across individual fisheries and for society overall; for its application, balanced harvest can be adopted at both strategic and tactical levels and need not be a full implementation, but could aim for a ''partiallybalanced'' harvest. Further objective discussions and research on this subject are needed to move balanced harvest toward supporting a practical ecosystem approach to fisheries.