2012
DOI: 10.1890/11-1319.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What are we protecting? Fisher behavior and the unintended consequences of spatial closures as a fishery management tool

Abstract: Spatial closures like marine protected areas (MPAs) are prominent tools for ecosystem-based management in fisheries. However, the adaptive behavior of fishermen, the apex predator in the ecosystem, to MPAs may upset the balance of fishing impacts across species. While ecosystem-based management (EBM) emphasizes the protection of all species in the environment, the weakest stock often dominates management attention. We use data before and after the implementation of large spatial closures in a North Pacific tra… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
83
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
83
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More recently, conservation and fisheries management goals have been converging (Gaines et al 2010;Rice et al 2012) under more inclusive ecosystem-based management (EBM) regimes (Salomon et al 2011). Implementing such closed areas remains controversial (Gell and Roberts 2003;Abbott and Haynie 2012), particularly in temperate seas where evidence of their effectiveness in meeting management objectives is often lacking (Auster and Shackell 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, conservation and fisheries management goals have been converging (Gaines et al 2010;Rice et al 2012) under more inclusive ecosystem-based management (EBM) regimes (Salomon et al 2011). Implementing such closed areas remains controversial (Gell and Roberts 2003;Abbott and Haynie 2012), particularly in temperate seas where evidence of their effectiveness in meeting management objectives is often lacking (Auster and Shackell 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover it neglects to consider possible adaptation of the fishermen to the new conditions. These aspects have proven to be important (Salas and Gaertner 2004;Abbott and Haynie 2012) and could be included by adding a dynamic model of the fleet spatial behaviour, linked to the fishing costs and the prices of the fish. Several models that incorporate these effects are documented in the literature (Wilen et al 2002;Grafton et al 2005;Dowling et al 2011), but in order to better anticipate the possible re-allocation of effort in response the implementation of an MPA, we need first to deepen our understanding of fisher behaviour (Salas and Gaertner 2004;Torres-Irineo et al 2011;Abbott and Haynie 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The history of fisheries management is replete with examples of such unintended consequences [2,31], for example with attempts to control total fishing effort regularly undermined by the ingenuity of fishers in substituting between various forms of controlled and uncontrolled effort i.e. when restrictions on the number of vessels results in increased vessel or engine size.…”
Section: Challenges and Design Considerations For Nudges In Recreatiomentioning
confidence: 99%