Effects of increased specialization on revenue of Alaskan salmon fishers over four decades

Abstract

Abstract1. Theory and previous studies have shown that commercial fishers with a diversified catch across multiple species may experience benefits such as increased revenue and reduced variability in revenue. However, fishers can only increase the species diversity of their catch if they own fishing permits that allow multiple species to be targeted, or if they own multiple single-species permits. Individuals holding a single permit can only increase catch diversity within the confines of their permit (e.g. by fishing longer or over a broader spatial area).2. Using a large dataset of individual salmon fishers in Alaska, we build a Bayesian variance function regression model to understand how diversification impacts revenue and revenue variability, and how these effects have evolved since the 1970s.3. Applying these models to six salmon fisheries that encompass a broad geographic range and a variety of harvesting methods and species, we find that the majority of these fisheries have experienced reduced catch diversity through time and increasing benefits of specialization on mean individual revenues. 4. One factor that has been hypothesized to reduce catch diversity in salmon fisheries is large-scale hatchery production. While our results suggest negative correlations between hatchery returns and catch diversity for some fisheries, we find little evidence for a change in variability of annual catches associated with increased hatchery production. Synthesis and applications.Despite general trends towards more specialization among commercial fishers in Alaska, and more fishers exclusively targeting salmon, we find that catching fewer species can have positive effects on revenue. With increasing specialization, it is important to understand how individuals buffer against risk, as well as any barriers that prevent diversification. In addition to being affected | INTRODUCTIONCommercial fishers experience high degrees of variability in revenue Sethi, Dalton, & Hilborn, 2012). Understanding the incentives and risks that fishers experience, as well as the diversification strategies they adopt to minimize year-to-year variability in revenue is important for maintaining sustainable livelihoods and productive fisheries. As in terrestrial agriculture (Purdy, Langemeier, & Featherstone, 1997), diversifying harvest may affect the mean or variance of revenue. Another parallel between fishers and farmers is that while the strategies of both may have some impact on revenue, a number of external drivers may also affect the ability or incentives to diversify. For commercial fishers, some of these factors include the prices offered by processors, the relative abundance of species and regulatory changes such as the adoption of permit or area restrictions.Because of the complexities of these factors, any benefits or costs of diversification may be variable through time.Some of the most detailed analyses of relationships between catch diversification and revenue have been focused on Alaskan fisheries. Perhaps one of the largest chang...

Thirty years of change and the future of Alaskan fisheries: Shifts in fishing participation and diversification in response to environmental, regulatory and economic pressures

“…Regulatory constraints and costs of entry can further limit fishery participation (Carothers & Chambers, ) or alter fishing behaviour (Salas & Gaertner, ; Wilen, Smith, Lockwood, & Botsford, ). Furthermore, the benefits of diversification may vary among individuals and fishery systems and there are cases where specialization translates into increased revenue with decreased revenue variability (e.g., some Alaskan salmon fisheries; Anderson et al., ; Ward et al., ). Mechanisms promoting specialization may act at the level of fisheries or individuals, such as increased efficiency gains and knowledge accumulation from specialization (Salas & Gaertner, ; Ward et al., ).…”

“…Furthermore, the benefits of diversification may vary among individuals and fishery systems and there are cases where specialization translates into increased revenue with decreased revenue variability (e.g., some Alaskan salmon fisheries; Anderson et al., ; Ward et al., ). Mechanisms promoting specialization may act at the level of fisheries or individuals, such as increased efficiency gains and knowledge accumulation from specialization (Salas & Gaertner, ; Ward et al., ). In recreational fisheries, people who are more specialized may be less likely to substitute alternative species or fishing methods (Sutton & Ditton, ).…”

Catch diversification provides multiple benefits in inland fisheries

“…However, a higher catch does not always guarantee more benefits for the following reasons. First, maximizing catch by targeting one or a few species (i.e., specialization) can pose long‐term risks if environmental and market conditions change rapidly and unexpectedly (Anderson et al., ; Dee et al., ; Ward et al., ). For example, Alaskan fishing communities that had high catch diversity or were able to opportunistically shift the species composition of their catch experienced small or negligible changes in revenue following major ocean and market regime shifts that occurred in 1989 (Cline et al., ).…”

“…Creating and maintaining flexibility in fishing opportunities could be one mechanism to make the benefits derived from exploitation of fish stocks more resilient to perturbation (Cline et al., ). In addition, catch diversity has been reported to stabilize total catch or revenue through portfolio effects (PEs; i.e., the statistical averaging of multiple species or populations) and asynchrony (Anderson et al., ; Nesbitt & Moore, ; Ward et al., ). The biodiversity–ecosystem functioning framework may help elucidate the mechanisms responsible for this enhanced stability.…”

How do commercial fishing licences relate to access?

“…Opportunities to switch between species are not constant or evenly spread among harvesters and coastal communities (Beaudreau et al, ; Fuller et al, ; Holland & Kasperski, ; Holland et al, ; Sethi et al, ; Ward et al, ). Two key determinants include proximity of home port to stocks and levels of fishing experience and environmental knowledge (Sethi et al, ; Ward et al, ). licence holdings may be a third, as Ward et al (, p. 1082) discuss ‘fishers can only increase the species diversity of their catch if they own fishing permits that allow multiple species to be targeted, or if they own multiple single‐species permits.…”