Conservation-Status Gaps for Marine Top-Fished Commercial Species

Abstract

Biodiversity loss is a global problem, accelerated by human-induced pressures. In the marine realm, one of the major threats to species conservation, together with climate change, is overfishing. In this context, having information on the conservation status of target commercial marine fish species becomes crucial for assuring safe standards. We put together fisheries statistics from the FAO, the IUCN Red List, FishBase, and RAM Legacy databases to understand to what extent top commercial species’ conservation status has been assessed. Levels of assessment for top-fished species were higher than those for general commercial or highly commercial species, but almost half of the species have outdated assessments. We found no relation between IUCN Red List traits and FishBase Vulnerability Index, depreciating the latter value as a guidance for extinction threat. The RAM database suggests good management of more-threatened species in recent decades, but more data are required to assess whether the trend has reverted in recent years. Outdated IUCN Red List assessments can benefit from reputed stock assessments for new reassessments. The future of IUCN Red List evaluations for commercial fish species relies on integrating new parameters from fisheries sources and improved collaboration with fisheries stakeholders and managers.

Monitoring extinction risk and threats of the world’s fishes based on the Sampled Red List Index

“…IUCN Red List evaluations for marine fishes are important to achieve their survival and that of human communities which rely on them for food. Despite the difficulties of integrating fisheries data into the IUCN Red List evaluation process (Davies and Baum 2012;Millar and Dickey-Collas 2018;Miqueleiz et al 2022), we consider that current threat levels require the commitment of all parties involved to ensure marine fish conservation.…”

The global influence of the IUCN Red List can hinder species conservation efforts

“…Consequently, the reported abundances and population trends for some species are often "guesstimates" (Mallon & Jackson 2017) and can be misleading (Fox et al 2019;Wilson et al 2011). In the oceans, criterion A [Population size reduction] is only of limited value for assessing the level of depletion and exploitation rate of fish stocks and could benefit from integrating new parameters from fisheries sources (Millar & Dickey-Collas 2018;Miqueleiz et al 2022). The quantitative criterion E encourages population viability analyses and can indicate species' probability of extinction.…”

“…Furthermore, some assessed species could already be threatened, but reassessments have not been undertaken, which are recommended every 10 years (IUCN 2016). For instance, in the marine realm, over 40% of top-fished species have outdated assessments (Miqueleiz et al 2022). Overall, 28% of assessments have already been declared outdated (IUCN 2023), potentially undermining the long-term use of the Red List (Rondinini et al 2014).…”

A global ecological signal of extinction risk in marine ray-finned fishes (class Actinopterygii)

“…Nonetheless, more consideration could be taken into account when evaluating commercially fished species given the expectation that populations will fluctuate in response to harvesting. A potential approach is the one called for by Miqueleiz et al (2022), who suggest relying more heavily on criteria E (modeling of extinction risk) and incorporating management strategy evaluation, which utilizes simulations to judge the outcome of management actions (Punt et al, 2016), into assessments of the overall extinction risk of a species.…”