Differences in lobster fishing effort before and after MPA establishment

Guenther, Carla M.; López‐Carr, David; Lenihan, Hunter S.

doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.12.016

Cited by 14 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Congruent with Guenther et al. (), we did not find support for fishing‐the‐line. Although substantial nightly movement patterns by lobster generate an incentive for lobster fishers to fish the line (Withy‐Allen and Hovel ), Guenther et al.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…We did not find any significant variable influencing the spatial pattern of fishing effort for lobster fishers before or after MPA establishment. Congruent with Guenther et al (2015), we did not find support for fishing-the-line. Although substantial nightly movement patterns by lobster generate an incentive for lobster fishers to fish the line (Withy-Allen and Hovel 2013), Guenther et al (2015) attributed their findings to the lack of continuity of habitat near MPA borders where spillover can occur (but see Parnell et al 2007Parnell et al , 2010, as well as to the potentially large fines that lobster fishers can incur when their traps drift inside the boundaries of the MPA.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 92%

“…Although substantial nightly movement patterns by lobster generate an incentive for lobster fishers to fish the line (Withy‐Allen and Hovel ), Guenther et al. () attributed their findings to the lack of continuity of habitat near MPA borders where spillover can occur (but see Parnell et al. , ), as well as to the potentially large fines that lobster fishers can incur when their traps drift inside the boundaries of the MPA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, Guenther et al. ), despite its critical role in developing realistic expectations of the outcomes of existing and proposed marine spatial plans (Smith and Wilen , Charles ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, some have argued that the main source of uncertainty in fisheries management is not the dynamics of the exploited resources, but the behavior and decision-making processes of resource users (Hilborn 1985, Fulton et al 2011). More specifically, accurate characterization of fishers' decision-making and behavior is rare (but see Parnell et al 2010, Guenther et al 2015, despite its critical role in developing realistic expectations of the outcomes of existing and proposed marine spatial plans Wilen 2003, Charles 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Drivers of redistribution of fishing and non‐fishing effort after the implementation of a marine protected area network

Cabral

Gaines

Johnson

et al. 2017

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is increasingly utilized to sustainably manage ocean uses. Marine protected areas (MPAs), a form of spatial management in which parts of the ocean are regulated to fishing, are now a common tool in MSP for conserving marine biodiversity and managing fisheries. However, the use of MPAs in MSP often neglects, or simplifies, the redistribution of fishing and non-fishing activities inside and outside of MPAs following their implementation. This redistribution of effort can have important implications for effective MSP. Using long-term (14 yr) aerial surveys of boats at the California Channel Islands, we examined the spatial redistribution of fishing and non-fishing activities and their drivers following MPA establishment. Our data represent 6 yr of information before the implementation of an MPA network and 8 yr after implementation. Different types of boats responded in different ways to the closures, ranging from behaviors by commercial dive boats that support the hypothesis of fishing-the-line, to behaviors by urchin, sport fishing, and recreational boats that support the theory of ideal free distribution. Additionally, we found that boats engaged in recreational activities targeted areas that are sheltered from large waves and located near their home ports, while boats engaged in fishing activities also avoided high wave areas but were not constrained by the distance to their home ports. We did not observe the expected pattern of effort concentration near MPA borders for some boat types; this can be explained by the habitat preference of certain activities (for some activities, the desired habitat attributes are not inside the MPAs), species' biology (species such as urchins where the MPA benefit would likely come from larval export rather than adult spillover), or policy-infraction avoidance. The diversity of boat responses reveals variance from the usual simplified assumption that all extractive boats respond similarly to MPA establishment. Our work is the first empirical study to analyze the response of both commercial and recreational boats to closure. Our results will inform MSP in better accounting for effort redistribution by ocean users in response to the implementation of MPAs and other closures.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, Guenther et al. ), despite its critical role in developing realistic expectations of the outcomes of existing and proposed marine spatial plans (Smith and Wilen , Charles ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Drivers of redistribution of fishing and non‐fishing effort after the implementation of a marine protected area network

Cabral

Gaines

Johnson

et al. 2017

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Increasing spillover enhances southern California spiny lobster catch along marine reserve borders

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conservation benefits of marine reserves are well established but their contribution to adjacent fisheries via spillover is less certain and context‐dependent. Theoretical predictions do not always match empirical evidence from individual reserves, so carefully designed studies are essential for accurately assessing spillover and its contribution to fisheries. Biomass buildup within reserves, and spillover from reserve borders, also usually takes time to develop. In 2003, a network of no‐take marine reserves was established in the Northern Channel Islands (NCI) of southern California (CA) to conserve biodiversity and to eventually enhance local fisheries through spillover of larvae, juveniles, and adults. The reserve network impacted the local CA spiny lobster (Panulirus interruptus) fishery by removing about 20% of fishing grounds in the NCI. In 2008, a collaborative fisheries research effort detected substantial lobster population increases within reserves, and an indication of the possible spillover of adult lobsters across reserve borders. To estimate whether and how much populations within reserves, and spillover from reserves, have increased through time, we repeated the sampling program 10 years later in 2018 at two of the three original reserves. Scientific trapping was conducted prior to the fishing season along a spatial gradient beginning deep within the reserves to reference sites located outside (≥2 km) of reserve borders. Results showed that legal‐sized lobster abundance in traps (catch per unit effort) increased by 125%–465% deep inside reserves, and by 223%–331% at sites near to reserve borders, and by nearly 400% just outside of reserve borders over the 10‐year period, thus indicating a substantial increase in spillover across reserve borders. A similar pattern was observed in lobster biomass caught in traps at the two reserves. This study demonstrates how spillover scales with biomass buildup and that collaborative fisheries research can be used to assess the efficacy of marine reserves as fishery management tools worldwide.

show abstract

Advancing ocean ecosystem conservation via property rights, rather than marine protected areas (MPAs)

Libecap

2024

Maritime Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is demand to protect at-risk fish species and ecosystems. Property rights regimes can be superior to spatial controls via Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) for doing so. Empirical cases from Australia and the US indicate that MPAs are inequitable, too large and restrictive, and controversial. These conditions lead to resistance and political pushback, threatening long-term budgets and conservation goals. A critique of MPAs is presented along with a range of property rights arrangements–common, community, private—and Coasean bargaining as alternatives. Outlined benefits are a.) Rights holders have a stake in conservation and are central in its design. They are more than respondents. b). Costs/benefits can be more equally distributed, including direct payments that include both costs of transition and contribution to public goods provision. c.) Spatial set-asides confront tradeoffs and hence, are more apt to be economically sited and designed. d.) Modifications can occur more smoothly through market exchange than through the political process. Durable global conservation efforts can be enhanced.

show abstract

Differences in lobster fishing effort before and after MPA establishment

Cited by 14 publications

References 39 publications

Drivers of redistribution of fishing and non‐fishing effort after the implementation of a marine protected area network

Drivers of redistribution of fishing and non‐fishing effort after the implementation of a marine protected area network

Increasing spillover enhances southern California spiny lobster catch along marine reserve borders

Advancing ocean ecosystem conservation via property rights, rather than marine protected areas (MPAs)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About