Gigapixel big data movies provide cost‐effective seascape scale direct measurements of open‐access coastal human use such as recreational fisheries

Abstract

Collecting data on unlicensed open‐access coastal activities, such as some types of recreational fishing, has often relied on telephone interviews selected from landline directories. However, this approach is becoming obsolete due to changes in communication technology such as a switch to unlisted mobile phones. Other methods, such as boat ramp interviews, are often impractical due to high labor cost. We trialed an autonomous, ultra‐high‐resolution photosampling method as a cost effect solution for direct measurements of a recreational fishery. Our sequential photosampling was batched processed using a novel software application to produce “big data” time series movies from a spatial subset of the fishery, and we validated this with a regional bus‐route survey and interviews with participants at access points. We also compared labor costs between these two methods. Most trailer boat users were recreational fishers targeting tuna spp. Our camera system closely matched trends in temporal variation from the larger scale regional survey, but as the camera data were at much higher frequency, we could additionally describe strong, daily variability in effort. Peaks were normally associated with weekends, but consecutive weekend tuna fishing competitions led to an anomaly of high effort across the normal weekday lulls. By reducing field time and batch processing imagery, Monthly labor costs for the camera sampling were a quarter of the bus‐route survey; and individual camera samples cost 2.5% of bus route samples to obtain. Gigapixel panoramic camera observations of fishing were representative of the temporal variability of regional fishing effort and could be used to develop a cost‐efficient index. High‐frequency sampling had the added benefit of being more likely to detect abnormal patterns of use. Combinations of remote sensing and on‐site interviews may provide a solution to describing highly variable effort in recreational fisheries while also validating activity and catch.

Assessing the viability of small aerial drones to quantify recreational fishers

“…The complimentary use of drones within fisheries management may be the optimal use of this technology, such as the rapid detection of passive fishing gear (Provost et al., 2020), or for assessing stocks to determine the effect of management decisions (Beckmann et al., 2019). Emerging technology enables the development of innovative techniques (Bradley et al., 2019), and the comparison of these to established methods is important to inform best practise and cost‐benefit analyses when designing surveys (Ezat, Fritsch, & Downs, 2018; Fernando et al., 2019; Flynn et al., 2018; Wood et al., 2016). Furthermore, simultaneous drone‐ and vessel‐based methods allowing for direct comparison of data in future studies are recommended (Desfosses, Adams, Blight, Smallwood, & Taylor, 2019).…”

“…If the study locations were smaller, that is focusing on counting fishers on the training walls and river bar area; then, there would be additional safety and cost benefits in using drone‐based surveys. Data that contribute to the effective management of natural resources are increasingly being collected via remote sensing technologies (Beckmann et al., 2019; Steffe et al., 2017), with expanding contributions from novel techniques, such as smartphone applications (Venturelli, Hyder, & Skov, 2017) and innovative camera‐based methods (Flynn et al., 2018; Hartill, Payne, Rush, & Bian, 2016; van Poorten & Brydle, 2018; Taylor et al., 2018). Additionally, citizen science may be appropriate for efficient data collection (Fairclough, Brown, Carlish, Crisafulli, & Keay, 2014; Fulton et al., 2019) and foster a culture of voluntary catch reporting.…”

Recreational fishery discard practices influence use of tidal estuary by a large marine mesopredator

“…Similarly, recreational fishing effort is increased on nonbusiness days (i.e. weekends and holidays; Parnell et al 2010;van Poorten et al 2015;Flynn et al 2018;Kendall et al 2021). Therefore, hour of the day and day of the week served as temporal variables for investigating the influence of provisioning activity.…”

Cost-efficiency assessments of marine monitoring methods lack rigor—a systematic mapping of literature and an end-user view on optimal cost-efficiency analysis

“…In the studies that argued that the method is costefficient based on its cost compared to other methods, the focus was often on other issues, and the costefficiency was mentioned only in passing. Costs were sometimes equated to labor costs, e.g., the time spent on the collection and processing of data (e.g., Flynn et al, 2019) or to logistical costs calculated as person days (e.g., Stringel et al, 2014). Some studies did not mention the financial cost of the method at all, but the cost-efficiency assessment was based only on the superior attributes of the novel method, such as faster operation or better detection capabilities, implying either reduced costs of monitoring or increased data utility.…”